JUDGMENT :

GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

1. The appellant/plaintiff brought suit for declaration that Bazidawa Deed No. 991 dated 16.02.2061 executed by Chhatu Gareri in favour of the Nanhak Gareri was a fraudulent and forged document and as such it did not confer any right title and interest upon them and for declaration that the suit land was in possession of the plaintiffs are their raiyati land.

2. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court, and the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants/plaintiffs against the Judgment of affirmation in Title Appeal No. 40/1984 of the judgment and decree pass by the trial court.

3. The Genealogy of the parties as given in Para 2 of the plaint is not in dispute. Doman Gareri the recorded tenant of Khata No. 59 situated at Village-Kundri consisting of several plots were jointly recorded in possession of Doman Gareri and his two brothers Bharosa and Budhu Gareri as they had taken together one share out of four shares in Khata No. 59. Bharosa Gareri and Budhu Gareri died issueless and Doman Gareri became the sole tenant of Khata No. 59 and after his death, his sons Sewak Gareri & Chhutu Gareri got ½ share in the said plots. There was another Khata No. 2 of Village Alaula in which Doman, Bharosa and Budhu Gareri together had 1/6th share in the land of this Khata comprising of Plot Nos. 276,291 and 291. After the death of Bharosa and Budhu Gareri, Doman became the sole tenant in respect of 1/6 share of this Khata, after his death Sewak Gareri and his sons became the tenant in respect of 1/12th share of this Khata. Consequently, on death of Doman Gareri the entire property of Khata No. 59 of village Kundri and Khata No. 2 of Village-Alaula were jointly succeeded by his son Sewak Gareri and Chhathu Gareri and their sons. In this way branch of Sewak Gareri got half share and branch of Chattu got half share out of the total share of Doman. Properties in the separate possession were separately mutated and the demand was opened in the name of Chhathu Gareri, the original Plaintiff No. 1 and they came in possession over the entire suit property. Further case of the plaintiffs is that the defendants got executed a deed of Bazidawa No. 991 dated 16.02.1961 by Chhathu Gareri, the original plaintiff no. 1, in favour of Nanhak Gareri in respect to entire suit property of Khata No. 2 of Village-Alaula and Khata No. 52 of Village Kundri. It is asserted that the deed of Bazidawa was forged document because Chhathu Gareri was blind and the defendants misrepresented him to give his LTI on the paper meant for getting loan from the government and alternative plea of forgery by impersonating Chhathu Gareri has also been taken that the defendants has committed forgery and thereby created a forged document of Bazidawa.

4. The case of the Defendant is that survey entries about the name of Doman Gareri and his two brothers in Khata No. 59 of village Kundri or in Khata No. 2 of Village Alaula were incorrect. The two brothers lived jointly in Village Kundri and Alaula shortly before cadastral survey and had acquired raiyati lands in Village Kundari and Alaula which came to be recorded under Khata No. 59 of Village Kundari and Khata No. 2 of Village Alaula. Doman Gareri and his two brothers where disgusted with the living condition and wanted to move out of the village, therefore, they decided to sell away all land and houses and to purchase sheep with the price thereof and to take the profession of their caste that is of rearing sheep. But the wife of Doman Gareri viz Sanicheria Garerin did not like to move out from the village with them. So, they sold 3/4th of their land to one Jatadhari Shukla and gave remaining one fourth with the house on Plot No. 9764 Khata No. 59 of Village Kundri to his wife Sanicharian Garerin and Mewa Gareri. This took place before survey and the survey authorities without local inspecti