Law:

Section: S. 42

Specific Relief Act (1 of 1877), S. 42-Plaintiffailing to prove title-Not entitled to declaration that he is in possession.   Ganesh Rai v. Bhushi Rai A I R 1925 All. 69 rel   JUDGMENT   This appeal arises out of a suit for confirmation of possession on declaration of title to the land in suit. According to the plaintiffs the disputed lands consisting of as many as five plots were all along in their possession from the time of their father in lieu of service rendered by way of washing clothes. In other words, the plaintiffs' case in substance was that they were remunerated out of the usufructs of these lands for washing clothes of the landlords concerned. The plaintiffs further case was that the defendants purchased in a revenue sale the relevant touzi No. 4266 and in spite of the fact that service has been rendered as usual the defendants have been threatening the possession of the plaintiffs who are thus compelled to bring the present suit.   The defence inter alia was that the lands in question were resumed by the previoustouzi owner Abdur Rouf Choudhury inasmuch as the plaintiffs failed to render service and further that the defendants after their purchase in the revenue sale got the lands in khas ignoring the so-called claim of the plaintiffs. The learned Munsif found that the plaintiffs failed to prove that they had been washing clothes of the defendants. It was also found that the defendants were in possession. In this view of the matter, the suit was dismissed. On an appeal the learned Subordi nate Judge, however, held that the plaintiffs were in possession and as such the defendant's story of taking khas possession after the revenue sale could not be accepted. The suit was accordingly decreed and the appeal was allowed.   Mr. M. A. Khondkar appearing on behalf of the defen dant-appellants contends thatmost of the findings being in favour of the defendants in regard to the question as to whether the plaintiffs succeeded in proving condition of service as alleged and the entries in the R. S. records being in favour of the defendants, the learned Subordinate Judge erred in law in relying upon oral evidence which for good…