SHIV RAM Vs. RAM CHANDAND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal arises out of a suit for possession. The facts briefly stated are as follows:

(2.) AS regards the finding of the District Judge that the Plaintiffs were the owners of 94 bighas and 3 biswas of land out of the suit land that has not been challenged before us. The only point urged by the Appellants' counsel is that the adverse possession of the Appellants had been proved and that the Courts below were wrong in holding that the suit was within time. Counsel laid stress upon the revenue entries in this connection and argued that the Plaintiffs had been out of possession for long and inference should be raised that the Appellants' possession was ad verse against them.

(3.) I agree.