M.N. Shukla, J. - (1.) This is a Defendants second appeal arising out of a suit for perpetual injunction restraining the Appellants from interfering with the Respondent's possession over the gher in dispute. The suit was dismissed by the trial court but decreed by the lower appellate court and hence the Defendants have come in second appeal to this Court.
(2.) A perusal of the plaint in the present case indicates that the suit was brought by the Plaintiff -Respondent on the basis of title long user i.e. exercising certain acts of possession of miscellaneous nature. It may also be possible to spell out a case of possessory title. The averments in the plaint were that the Plaintiff was the owner of the gher and had been using it for tethering of cattle and keeping ghoor gani and bhitauras. In these circumstances the three main points on which the decision in the case must depend are as follows: 1. Whether the Plaintiff succeeded in proving his title? 2. Whether the use of the suit land for miscellaneous purposes would confer any title on the Plaintiff in case such user is established ?
(3.) Whether the Plaintiff can succeed on the basis of possessory title i.e. long prior possession in the instant case where the Defendants asserted their own title? 3. On the question of title the trial court framed a specific issue: Whether the Plaintiff is the owner of the Gher in suit and trees existing thereon as alleged ? The Plaintiff's title was clearly negatived by the trial court which came to the conclusion that the Plaintiff was not the owner of the land in suit or the trees standing thereon. That finding was not reversed by the lower appellate court and consequently it must be held that the Plaintiff failed to prove his title i.e. he was not the owner of the property in suit.;