ABDUL BARI Vs. ASRAB ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition of revision is directed against an order of the Munsiff of Cachar dated 30 -6 -1951 by which plaintiff's suit for possession of the disputed land was decreed under Section 9, Specific Relief Act.

(2.) PLAINTIFF 's case was that he was in occupation of 5 powas of land under his Mirasdar and he was dispossessed forcibly on 12 -6 -1950 by the defendant. Defendant pleaded that he had been in possession of the suit land under one Arju Mia and others and denied that he dispossessed the plaintiff forcibly as alleged.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the defendant petitioner has contended before me that the findings arrived at on the two questions that arose in the case are erroneous. He has pointed out that the learned Munsiff was influenced to a considerable extent by the fact that the plaintiff admittedly had his 'bari' on the 'bhita' left by Esub and Yakub, the previous occupants of the land. It is true that this circumstance has been considered as a relevant piece of evidence and the learned counsel does not dispute its relevancy. The land in dispute is admittedly contiguous to the 'bari' which is in plaintiff's possession. His contention that he came in occupation of the land after the previous, occupants receives support from his admitted possession of the 'bari'. There is also direct evidence consisting of the statements of two witnesses which show that he was in possession and had been dispossessed.