The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility of the adoption deed, the presumption of truth attached to entries in revenue records, and the legal principles governing adoption under Hindu Law.

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.

This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.04.1998 passed by learned District Judge, Solan camp at Nalagarh in Civil Appeal No. 86- NL/13 of 1996, whereby the judgment and decree passed by learned Sub Judge 1st Class, Nalagarh in Civil Suit No. 420/1 of 1991 dated 29.10.1996 has been affirmed and appeal dismissed.

2. The facts of the case not in controversy, in a nut-shell, are that Jangi was the common ancestor of the parties to the present lis. He was succeeded by his two sons Anant Ram and Dhani Ram. Dhani Ram had two sons namely Govind Ram and Shiv Saran. They both have since died and the parties to the present lis are their legal heirs. Anant Ram was issueless. He adopted during his lifetime Shiv Saran, predecessor-ininterest of defendants vide adoption deed dated 29.02.1999, Ext. PW-1/A. On the death of Anant Ram, it is Shiv Saran who inherited his property vide mutation No. 14 dated 01.12.1955, however, on the death of Dhani Ram, the estate he left behind was mutated in favour of both Govind Ram and Shiv Saran vide mutation No. 11 dated 26.02.2005 Therefore, Shiv Saran came to be entered being owner of the property left behind by his father deceased Dhani Ram to the extent of half share along with his brother Govind Ram, predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs. On the basis of such entries Shiv Saran filed an application for separation of the land to the extent of half share out of the suit land before the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Nalagarh in the year 1978. The plaintiffs, however, have raised the question of title on the ground that after being adopted as his son by Anant Ram, he left with no right, title or interest in the suit property. Learned Assistant Collector 1st Grade has, therefore, dismissed the application with liberty to deceased Shiv Saran to get the question of title so raised decided in a Civil Court having jurisdiction to entertain and decide the same. Said Shiv Saran instead of filing a suit in the civil Court, preferred an appeal registered as Case No. 13/79 before the Collector, Nalgarh against the order passed by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade. The appeal, however, also met with the same fate because learned Collector has dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order passed by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade. Since in the record-of-rights, the suit land entered in Khewat/Khatauni No. 9/9 Kitas 11 measuring 6b-4b is in exclusive possession and ownership of the plaintiff and land comprised in Khewat/Khatauni No. 10/10 Kita 13 measuring 11b-2b is in exclusive possession and ownership of the parforma defendants and land comprised in Khewat/Khatauni No. 11/11 kitas 8 measuring 11b-19b is in joint possession and ownership of the plaintiff and proforma defendants and land comprised in Khewat/Khatauni No. 16/16 Kitas 3 measuring 9 bighas is in joint possession of the plaintiffs and proforma defendants to the extent of shares given in the Jamabandi and land comprised in Khewat/Khatauni No. 7/7 Kitas 6 measuring 1b-19b as per entries in the Jamabandi for the year 1988-89 situated in village Malaun Bhagatan, Hadbasts No. 107, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P. was recorded to the extent of half share in the name of said Shiv Saran on the basis of mutation of inheritance sanctioned and attested in his favour and in that of his brother Govind Ram, predecessor-in-interest of plaintiff and on the death of their father Dhani Ram and as said Shiv Saran was adopted son of Anant Ram, his real (Taya), the plaintiffs, therefore, sought declaration to the effect that it is they along with defendants No. 11 and 12 are exclusive owner in possession of the suit land and the entries showing the defendants as owners in possession are illegal, null and void, hence void-abinitio having no effect on the rights of the plaintiffs and proforma defendants thereon. As a consequential relief, a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants