Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—The appeal has been restored to its original number vide order of date passed on recall application. As requested by learned counsel for the parties, since this appeal is pending for the last more than 25 years, I proceed to decide this appeal finally.

2. Heard Ch. N.A. Khan, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri M.A. Qadeer, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Shamim Ahmad, learned counsel for respondent.

3. While hearing this appeal under Order 41 Rule 11, this Court formulated four substantial questions of law, as under:

“(1) Whether Smt. Johara Begum made an oral gift of her property in favour of Bande Ali?

(2) Whether Ext. A-66 was compulsorily registrable?

(3) Whether the Court below acted illegally in rejecting material evidence and in wrongly interpreting material documents on the record? and,

(4) Whether the judgment and decree passed by the Court below are vitiated in law?”

4. This is a defendants’ appeal. The plaintiff-respondent, Zakir Hussain instituted Original Suit No. 481 of 1975 for a declaration that disputed house shown at the bottom of plaint as A, B, C, D is owned by him. The aforesaid suit was instituted in the Court