JUDGMENT :

This is an appeal by the defendant being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the concurrent findings and decisions of the Courts below holding the respondents/plaintiffs entitled to possession of the suit property based on title.

2. For the sake of convenience the parties will be referred according to their status before the trial court.

3. The sum and substance of the pleadings are to the effect that one Rampyaribai was the owner of the suit property which was described as property bearing C.T.S. No. 4670 corresponding to Municipal House No. 3-5-8 of Aurangabad, except the two shops from the ground floor which have been in possession of the defendants as tenants. According to plaintiffs, Rampyaribai had executed a power of attorney in favour of one Subhash and Ajay from whom they purchased it under a sale-deed. They averred that pursuant to the sale-deed they were put in possession of the suit property. However, the defendants clandestinely entered into possession.

Hence they prayed for possession of the suit property based on title.

4. The defendants resisted the suit in toto. They admitted that Rampyaribai was owner of the suit property. They also admitted that they were in poss