Legal research in civil law

According to the suit property respondents are brothers. The suit land was owned by the father of the parties whose death devolved upon his widow and the said children and Mutation was attested. The mother proceeded to gift in favour of the petitioner vide mutation attested that the respondents without the knowledge of the petitioner got sanctioned Mutation on purporting to be of a gift of the suit land by the petitioner in favour of her brothers. The owner of the property is a pardanashin and uneducated lady and she did not make any gift in favour of her brothers and that she did not deliver possession under any gift; that she did not appear before any Revenue Officer in the matter of mutation; earlier a suit was filed that was withdrawn to file a fresh suit. The respondents put in a written statement asserting that the petitioner had made a valid gift in their favour and delivered possession to them; they admitted the petitioner plea was her tenant. Councel of the owner contends to proceeds that misread the pleadings as well as evidence on record while proceedings to set aside respondent had failed to prove a valid gift having been made in their favour , respondent on the other hand argues that the onus to prove the issues as they were and she had failed to discharge the burden and correctly approached the matter and consequently the circumstances should not be interfered with. I have gone through the copies of the record appended with this civil dispute, I have already referred to the respective parties above. Aplan reading would show that it was the respondents who were claiming transfer of land in their favour by means of a gift.