|w^T^rf^rr^
c[§TT3TT^T$h^Jch|^cciTW^f5cT3T1^T
~ ^|^lfe^WRft'^'[^<^|^|<
^3Tf^T3TT^r|
|---|---|---|
|I.-.-
V|in view of the fact that th
property as early as at the time o1
and continued to be recorded in
Khasra Panchsala of 1973-74 anq
suit property was joint property
burden was on the defendants/a((
was the self acquired property o
proper appreciation of oral as well
prove that the suit property wa^
which is afinding offact.
the conclusion that the defenda|je suit property was recorded as joint
the survey settlement in Sarguja State
oint possession of Jhari and Mangal in
1978-79, a presumption arose that the
|and in this view of the ,matter, heavy
>pellants to prove that the suit property
f Mangal.
Both the Courts beiow on a
as documentary evidence have cometo
|its/appellants have miserably failed to
the self acquired property of Manga!|
|Kvr|In this view of the matter,
finding
recorded
by both the
appreciation of oral as well as d|
question of law arises for detern|
Second Appeal isdismissed atth
In view of the above, M
standsdismissed. No order as td
i
e
(|am of the considered oplnion that the
Courts below
is
based
on
a proper
)cumentary evidence and no substantial
iination in this appeal.
As a result, this
costs.
stage ofadmission.
C).P. No. 1439/2006 for grant of stay
Sd/-
DilipRaosahebDeshmukh
Judge|