JAYARAMA NAIDU Vs. SECYOF STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants sued the Secy. of State for a declaration that they were entitled both to a small triangle of land for which penal assessment had been levied by the defendant; and also to a shed and its site lying between this land and their house. They described the suit property as lying within the village natham. It has been found that the small triangle lies in tank poramboka and cannot be claimed by plaintiffs, and in regard to that portion the appeal is not pressed.

(2.) The District Munsif found that the plaintiffs are entitled to the other portions (C and D in the plan Ex. 3). The lower appellate Court reversed that finding and dismissed the suit. In respect to this latter portion the plaintiffs appeal.

(3.) The title set up in the plaint is that plaintiffs and their ancestors had been enjoying the property for more than a 100 years. The lower Courts have found that plaintiffs did not prove enjoyment for more than 30 years. That finding is not disputed; but plaintiffs contend that their 30 years enjoyment raises a presumption that they hold the property by immemorial right, and the burden rests upon the defendant to rebut that presumption. It cannot be said that any such presumption arises in the case of village site poramboke.