Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

17. Though the defendant claimed that he was in possession as an absolute owner, he did not establish the same by producing any material document. On the contrary, documents such as electricity bills, property tax paid receipts produced by him before the Court, did not, at any rate, establish his ownership of the property. Ex.D15 was the holder khatha which did not mention the name of the defendant and Ex.D16 which is the khatha extract merely showed the name as "holder".

18. In so far as the oral evidence on record, though the defendant tried to punch holes in the evidence of the plaintiff to generate a suspicion regarding the title of the plaintiff, the same cannot be believed as there are some documents to show that the khatha of the suit property stood in the name of the father of the plaintiff at an undisputed point of time i.e., in the year 1985. Since the only issue that had to be considered by the Court is whether there was any documentary evidence to establish the tenancy and also whether there was proper termination of tenancy, the oral evidence of the defendant needs to be considered.