The burden of proof lies on the party asserting the affirmative issue, and adverse possession requires the party to set up their own adverse title and remain in exclusive possession hostile to the true owner's title.

JUDGMENT

1. The present Second Appeal is preferred by the appellant aggrieved by the Decree and Judgment dtd. 18/2/2010 passed in A.S.No.14 of 2011 on the file of the Court of VII Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Madanapalle, in reversing the Judgment and decree in O.S.No.295 of 2008 dtd. 18/2/2010 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle.

2. For convenience the parties are hereinafter referred to as arrayed before the VII Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Madanapalle, in A.S.No.14 of 2011 (for short "the first appellate Court").

3. Originally, the suit in OS No.295 of 2008 was filed by the plaintiff before the Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, for grant of mandatory injunction and for delivery of possession of the suit schedule property. It is contended by respondent/plaintiff that his father Dasthagiri Sab along with his two brothers Reddy Sahebpeer Saheb Reddy Sulaiman Saheb filed a suit in O.S No.314 of 1943 on the file of District Munsif Court, Madanapalle for declaration and permanent injunction against Syed Yakub Saheb and his brothers. The said suit was decreed in favour of the father of the plaintiff. It is also held in the said judgment that the suit schedule property is a burial ground belonging to ancestors of the family of the plaintiff. The plaint 'A' schedule property is the property covered by the decree in O.S.No.314 of 1943. The plaint schedule property is situated in Pedda Bazaar Street of Madanapalle Town. Towards the north of the suit schedule property there is a bazaar street. Till date the tombs of the ancestors of the plaintiff are being maintained in the schedule property. The plaintiff had employed a person by name Jaffer Hussain to safeguard the tombs. The said Jaffer Hussain has been doing coconut business abutting the plaint schedule with the permission of the plaintiff. The said Jaffer Hussain became old and he was unable to continue his coconut business. He has handed over the said business to his nephew viz Syed Bavalakruddin, Sayyed Mahaboob Basha i.e., defendants herein. About 4 years ago, they put up two wooden bunks in the plaint 'B' schedule property which is part of the plaint 'A' schedule property facing two northern side and doing coconut and other business claiming adverse interest against him in respect of plaint 'B' schedule property. It is further stated that, the 1st defendant secured license from the Municipality in his name and the name of Jaffar Hussain in respect of plaint 'B' schedule property claiming title over it against his interest and his family members and that the defendants being trespassers encroached upon the plaint 'B' schedule property. Hence the plaintiff preferred the suit.

4. The defendants have filed written statements contending that the suit is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed in limini and the averments made in the plaint are incorrect. The suit schedule property is a Government poromboke land. The said property was occupied by one Sayyed Saheb, S/o. late Imam Saheb in the year 1950 and he put the wooden bunks. He has been doing coconut, turmeric, kumkum business etc. In the year 1965, he passed away. Later his brother Jaffer Hussain, S/o. Imam Saheb continued the business in the sad premises till 1972. Because Jaffer Hussain has become old man he had handed over the business to the defendants. Since 1972, the defendants have been doing business in the said wooden bunks. The plaintiff has nothing to do with the said property. The plaintiff gave wrong picture to the Court with false representation. It is further stated that the plaintiff has no valid title and possession over the property. The defendants acquired title over the property by adverse possession because they have been doing business since 1972. It is also stated that the plaintiff was never in possession of plaint 'B' schedule property. The defendants made applications to the revenue authorities for issuance of patta. But the said land is i