This suit was related to land. Plaintiff 1 and 2 claimed themselves to be the owner of the land. The assertion of the plaintiff is that the defendant who was the Manager of the Plaintiffs was liable to render the accounts after each Crop Harvest. The defendant was also required to maintain a register for keeping the account of income and expenditure as well as an inventory of the property of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs allege that the defendant misfeasance, so he was terminated from his service. The suit was for the Permanent Injunction, Mandatory Injunction and for the Possession of the Plot. The present appeal is directed against an order by the HC of Himachal Pradesh whereby the defendant’s second appeal was allowed and the suit was dismissed.  

Kumar Exports v. Sharma Carpets (2009) 2 SCC 513 it was held that the bare denial of passing the consideration and existence in debt, apparently would serve the purpose of the accused. 

Vishwa Vijai Bharti v. Fakhrul Hasan & Ors (1976) 3 SCC 642 it was held that the entries in the revenue record ought to be generally accepted at their face value and courts should not embark upon appellate enquiry into consideration. The court considered the judgement of Kumar Exports v. Sharma Carpets (2009) 2 SCC 513 the case is set out in the statutory notice and evidence adduced by the complainant during the trial.

It was found by the Court that HC has erred in law in allowing the defendant’s appeal relying upon the oral evidence. The onus of proof was on the defendant by the learned trial court. The defendant has failed to rebut the presumption of truth. The order of HC was set aside and the judgement and decree passed by the First Appellate Court is affirmed. The Appeal was allowed.