HARNAM SINGH Vs. BHIKIMBAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been filed at the instance of the plaintiff who succeeded in the trial court but the decision was reversed by the lower appellate court. In brief the facts relevant for the purposes of this appeal are as under: The house of the plaintiff is situated in the south-west of a Rasta at the corner and opposite to it there is a small piece of land which is in dispute, is shown by letters As. Be, Sa, Da in the plaint map. To the further north of the said land was a house of the defendants which was lying in a dilapidated condition and thereafter was the house of one Bam Chandra. The dispute related to the open piece of land which both the parties claimed as appurtenant to their houses.

(2.) Nobody had appeared on behalf of the respondents in this case.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and have also gone through the judgment of the courts below. The learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the decision of the lower appellate court on two grounds. Firstly, that the Court has mis-read material evidence on the record and has, therefore, returned a wrong finding of fact. Secondly, it was stated that the land in question was appurtenant to the house of the plaintiff-appellant and it was not necessary that the same should be adjacent to or contiguous to the house of the plaintiff.