ADMIT.
Following substantial questions of law arise for consideration in the present second appeal :
(i) Whether the Courts below have committed grave error in not believing the physical possession of the plaintiff based upon the principle of preponderance of probabilities?
(ii) Whether the Courts below have committed serious error in construction of the document i.e. a report of the Court Commissioner and to discard his evidence solely on the ground that defendant was absent at the time of panchnama despite the fact that though the defendant was served with the notice to remain present at the time of preparing panchnama he did not remain present?
(iii) Whether the Courts below are right in expecting the strict proof of actual physical possession of the suit property by the plaintiff, when the standard of proof in a civil case is different from the criminal case?
(iv) Whether the Lower Court has erred in ignoring the material evidence on record regarding "Pani Patrak" before 1990 and drawn wrong inference by holding otherwise?"
[M.R.SHAH,J] *dipti Top