ORDER

Respondent No. 1 - Rajendra Prasad had instituted a suit for declaration and possession over land bearing Khasra No. 257/3 against the Appellant on the ground that he had purchased this land from its previous owner - Premnarayan - by a registered sale-deed. It was further pleaded that the Appellant had forcibly taken possession and was trying to construct his house. The suit was resisted by the Appellant on the grounds, inter-alia, that the land in dispute was not part of Khasra Plot No. 257/3, but was part of Khasra Plot No. 257/1 which was the Government land and over which the Appellant was in possession since long, it having been leased out to him. It was also pleaded that he had constructed the house over that land.

2. On a consideration of the evidence on record, the trial Court decreed the suit. The decree was affirmed by the lower appellate court and upheld by the High Court in Second Appeal.

3. The principal contention raised by learned Counsel for the Appellant is that though there was a serious dispute with regard to the identity of the land in dispute, whether the land in dispute formed part of Khasra No. 257/3 or Khasra No. 257/1, the courts below did n