RAMU Vs. KANHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel holding brief of Shri O.N. Mishra, who appears for the appellant and Shri Madan Mohan Srivastava for the respondents 1 and 2.

(2.) The suit was filed with regard to land shown by letters A,B,C,D in the plaint map. The categorical case of the plaintiff was that the entire property of the parties had been partitioned earlier in time except the land shown by letters A, B, C, D.

(3.) The oral testimony of the plaintiff himself was to the effect that the land in question was used for cultivating vegetables and that he had seen in this state since the age of his discretion. Some trees also existed thereon.