FAKRULLAH KHAN Vs. PERKA POCHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The legal representatives of the plaintiff are the appellants in this Second Appeal. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff for declaration of title and possession on the basis of his previous possession. In order to appreciate the contentions of the parties, a reference to certain facts is necessary.

(2.) The predecessors-in-interest of the appellants filed a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession alleging that he was the owner enjoying the suit lands till 18th August, 1960, when he was dispossessed by the defendants. The defendants denied that the predecessors-in-title of the appellant, Murad Khan, was the owner and in possession of the suit lands and stated that they were the owners and were in possession in their right. They inter alia denied that they had dispossessed the plaintiff. The trial Court found that the title and possession of the plaintiff was proved. It also found that the defendants have wrongfully dispossessed the plaintiff.

(3.) In the result, the trial Court decreed the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession. Against the judgment and decree of trial Court, the defendants went in appeal. The appellate Court, while holding that the possession of the plaintiff for 8 or 9 years prior to the dispossession was proved dismissed the suit on the ground that that would not entitle him to a decree. The legal representatives of the plaintiff have now come up to this Court in Second Appeal.