Sections 8 and 42 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), section 115 suit were sufficiently substantiated on record to prove the plaintiff's claim in connection with the declaration of immovable property and the suit for possession thereof. There was nothing to deny the same evidence. The record has been established that the plaintiff acquired the suit property through inheritance on the basis of family division and the defendant had no interest in the same oral evidence and could not be preferred over the documentary evidence and if the party wishes to dispute the documentary evidence. If so, a very strong and extraordinary evidence was needed to rule out the same, which was lacking in the present case, no important and important aspect of the matter was ignored nor any material evidence was neglected. , Which led to the final outcome of the facts. The two courts below were based on reasonable definition of evidence and did not commit any error of law. High Court denies error
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
