This is an appeal against an order of the S.D.O., Nohir dated 10.8.60. We have heard the counsel for the parties and examined the record. The simple facts of the case are that the appellants applied for the correction of entries relating to Smt. year 2008 to 2012 in respect of Khasra No. 2. The respondents contested the application alleging that the entries that stood in the record required to be corrected. The learned S.D.O. held an inquiry and after recording both oral and documentary evidence came to the conclusion that the entries as made in the Girdawari were correct. Against the aforesaid order in this appeal it is urged before us that the oral evidence of the appellants had been rejected by the trial court for insufficient reasons. We have examined the reasons given by the learned Assistant Collector and we find that they are not cogent and sufficient to reject the oral evidence of the appellants. The learned Assistant Collector also placed reliance on Exs. P.1 and P. 2 which purport to be the true copies of Khasra Girdawari. These copies were issued by the Patwari under rule 28(b) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue Rules. Before these copies could become worthy of being received in evidence, it was necessary that the endorsement by the Patwari at the foot of document as required by sec. 76 of the Evidence Act must have been recorded. We have carefully examined these documents and find that such an endorsement has not been recorded. In the absence of this endorsement these exhibits have no evidentiary value and the trial court was in error in placing reliance on them. The result is that we find that no proper inquiry has been made in this case and in this view of the matter we accept this appeal, set aside the order of the trial court and remand the case back to him for holding a proper inquiry in accordance with the law and our observations made above.