Under Articles 42 and Q 54 of the Law Evidence (of 1984 of 10), the declaration of a permanent 100 suit filed by the plaintiff and the permanent injunction restraining suit under the plaintiffs, the courts ruled that the sale transaction was in favor of the plaintiff only. Was in connection with receiving the dedication. The plaintiff owned the disputed land and the disputed land for 15 years from the tenants as the property of the deceased defendant's legal inheritance was not transferred to the claimant that his father had purchased the disputed property. Land by the plaintiff for Rs.1000 in 1969 and 1970s. It said that this case was acknowledged by the plaintiff through unregistered documents dated 16 10 1969 and 15 6 1970. And since then, the deceased and after his death had inherited the legal inheritance of the disputed land. And their ownership was transferred through a change in the name of the plaintiff showing his deceased father as the owner of the disputed land as proof of his claim, which filed two unregistered documents on which It was reportedly executed in the year 696969 and in 1970 in. The documents were written more than 30 years ago, but the two courts below have said that the documents they have will be considered inadmissible for proof, as they cannot be registered, both courts have said. That the documents were declared fraudulent because the defendants did not sign the documents. The following courts, according to the law, did not justify the documents which showed the acknowledged receipts, which did not require registration. A.
