Back
HARKESH MANUJA
Paramjit Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Haryana Wakf Board – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Harkesh Manuja, J. (Oral) - Present revision petition has been filed against the order dated 02.12.2016 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Ambala, exercising the power of Wakf Tribunal, whereby, an application for seeking permission to lead additional evidence, filed at the instance of the petitioners-plaintiffs, has been dismissed.
2. In the present case, the petitioners filed a suit for declaration, claiming themselves to be the owners in possession of the suit property. They also sought declaration qua notices having been served upon them by the respondent-Board, regarding eviction. The suit was filed in the year 2012, thereafter, the issues were framed and the matter was fixed for recording the evidence of the petitioners, which was concluded somewhere in the year 2015. While the matter was listed for rebuttal and arguments, an application was filed on behalf of the petitioners-plaintiffs, seeking permission to lead additional evidence in the shape of revenue record so as to support their plea qua title over the suit property and to rebut the ownership of the respondent-Wakf Board. It is the said application, which has been dismissed
The court emphasized the importance of substantial justice over hypertechnical and narrow procedural rules, and highlighted the admissibility of public documents like jamabandies and mutations.
Procedural rules serve to advance justice, and denial of evidence crucial for adjudication violates the fair opportunity afforded to parties in a civil suit.
The revisional court may not re-assess evidence but can admit original documents that substantiate tenant relationships when previously doubted evidence was invalidated due to non-disclosure.
Revenue records do not establish ownership; the burden of proving title lies with the plaintiff, and failure to provide valid documentation leads to resolution against the claim.
The revisional court's powers are limited, and it cannot disturb findings of fact unless they are perverse; additional evidence must be justified and not used to fill gaps.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
