DARYASINGH HARISINGH Vs. KALMA NIHALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal involves a question regarding limitation, It arises out of a suit for possession brought by the plaintiff-respondent for possession of land situated in the village Titranya bearing Khasra No. 53 measuring 11. 1 acres and assessed to the revenue of Rs. 3-12-9. The suit was based on plaintiff's title and consequent right of the plaintiff to possess the same. There were no allegations as to when and how the defendant came into occupation and by what right. The cause of action was stated to be a demand for possession made by the plaintiff on 11-12-1954 by means of a registered notice and its non-compliance. Plaintiff claimed possession and mesno profits at Rs. 100/- per annum.

(2.) THE suit was resisted by the defendants who denied plaintiff's title to the land and asserted their own title and possession since generations. They expressed their ignorance regarding the existence of Patta of that land in plaintiff's name and the circumstances in which it was obtained. They also pleaded adverse possession for a period in excess of 60 or 70 years openly and as of right. This circumstance, according to them, had brought about an end of plaintiff's title, if any, to that land and had created one in themselves.

(3.) ON these pleadings issues regarding plaintiff's title and its loss by the plaintiff due to adverse possession by the defendants and their predecessors for over 12 years were framed.