evidence of DW-10 Ramchandra Choudhary, who has returned the mortgage deed after redemption of mortgage to the plaintiff, has also admitted that defendant no. 1 Rajbali Choudhary is the son of Gopi Choudhary. On the other hand defendant no. 1 adduced cogent, consistent and convincing evidence coupled with unimpeachable documentary evidence and has been able to controvert and revert the plaintiff's case and proved that he is son of Gopi Choudhary. The plaintiff has failed to prove that defendant no. 1, Rajbali Chouhdary, is not son of Gopi Chouhdary. Moreover, the plaintiff's witnesses have supported the case of defendant no. 1 and have admitted him to be the son of Gopi Chouhdary. The oral evidence adduced on behalf of defendant no. 1 includes own nephew of Gopi Choudhary and there is no reason as to why he will depose against the plaintiff. More so, all the DWs are of independent character except of Vendee of the defendant no. 1. It has further been held that from Ext.D/2 and Ext. F/6, the plaintiff is stopped from challenging that the defendant no. 1 Rajbali Chouhdary is not the son of Gopi Chouhdary. Ext.D/2 is of the year 1965, which was executed by the plaintiff,
