BHIM SINGH Vs. ZILE SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs having lost before the learned First Appellate Court have approached this Court through the present Regular Second Appeal.

(2.) The plaintiffs have filed a suit for declaration and for permanent injunction claiming that they had become owners of the suit land by way of adverse possession and as such being owners in possession are entitled to protect their possession. The plaintiffs claimed that the land measuring 3 kanals 14 marlas had remained in possession of the forefathers of the plaintiffs and the aforesaid possession was for a period of more than 60 years. In the meantime, consolidation took place in the village and new numbers were allotted in lieu of old numbers. The defendants were trying to dispossess them forcibly by getting revenue record changed, therefore, the suit was filed.

(3.) The defendants contested the suit and denied the claim of the plaintiffs. It was claimed that the plaintiffs were not even in possession of the suit land. It was also claimed by the defendants that there was some wrong entries in the revenue record which had been ordered to be corrected by the Assistant Collector. Consequently, the defendants claimed that they were owners in possession of the suit land.