Honble MADAN, J.–The petitioners are the LRs of late Shri Kanhaiyalal (defendant) while respondent Nos. 1 to 5 are the LRs of Anandilal (plaintiff). Late Kanhaiyalal and Anandilal were real brothers.

(2). Late Anandilal who is represented in this writ petition by NP Nos. 1 to 5 filed a suit on 3.12.73 bearing No. 199/78 for division of property under Sec. 53 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 for short the Act before the Assistant Collector Kota on 15.11.73 ad 3.12.73, respectively which was contested by the defendant-petitioner who filed written statement by contending inter-alia that plaintiff had executed a relinquishment deed of the land in dispute in favour of the defendant way back on 15.7.49 and since then he is in sole possession of the land in dispute. Apart from this, another objection which was raised was to the maintainability of the suit that it was time barred and the defendant had become the owner of the whole land in dispute by way of adverse possession. The trial Court thereafter on the basis of pleadings of the parties framed eight issues for adjudication of rival claims.

(3). In support of his evidence, plaintiff relied upon certain documents inter-alia Exh. 5 & 6 which are Jamabandis for Samwat Year 2023-2026 and 2027-2030 which are the record of rights by way of authentic and reliable evidence which shows that the land in dispute is in joint possession of both the plaintiff and defendant since long. By way of oral evidence the plaintiff got examined besides himself as PW-1 and five other witnesses. The defendant in his evidence adduced Exh.1 relinquishment deed dt. 15.7.49 which was on a plain paper neither registered nor stamped nor attested and in his oral evidence got examined besides himself as DW-1 and four other witnesses. The trial Court decided Issue Nos. 1 to 3, 5 & 7 together but as regards the Jamabandis which is a public record of rights of the party in possession, the said evidence was not only erroneously ignored but also overlooked and brushed aside for the Samwat year 2026-2030 which were adduced by the plaintiff in support of his case not only by the trial Court but also by the Appellate Court. It is well established that Jamabandi being a record of rights is more reliable than any other document to which reliance can safely be attached. Contrarily, trial Court erroneously placed reliance upon unregistered unattested/unstamped relinquishment deed and thereby declared the defendant as owner of the whole land in question vide order dt. 30.4.79 (Ann. 3). Against the said judgment of the trial Court, the plaintiff preferred an appeal before the revenue appellate authority Kota which too without application of mind and property considering and without going into the factual aspect aspect of the matter, relied on the said relinquishment deed and dismissed the appeal preferred by the plaintiff vide its judgment dt. 20.8.81 (Ann. 6).

(4). The plaintiff being aggrieved by the judgment of the appellate Court, preferred second appeal before the Board of Revenue Ajmer on the grounds inter-alia that the plaintiff- appellant and defendant-respondents are real brothers and the land in dispute has come in their share by virtue of succession after their fathers demise. In the record of rights i.e. Jamabandi for Samwat Year 2027 and 2023-36 they are both co- sharer of the land. As regards the relinquishment, it was contended by the plaintiff that it is not in respect of the land in dispute as it does not contain either the precise details of the land, Khasra numbers nor any change has been indicated ever since possession of the parties to their respective shares over the land and no change had ever since been made in the initial allotment. Hence, it was not a reliable document and it was totally unsafe to rely on such document as against the Jamabandis for the period in question which is revenue record being more authentic and reliable and for which the defendant had led sufficient corroborative evidence to es

Click Here to Read the rest of this document