P.K.Deb, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 5.5.1994 passed by Shri Raja Ram Singh, the then District Judge, Giridih in Title Appeal No. 8 of 1993 reversing the judgment and decree dated 6.2.1993 passed by Shri Vijay Bahadur Singh, Sub-Judge-III, Giridih in Title Suit No. 92 of 1986.

2. The suit of the plaintiff-respondent was dismissed in the original court while the said dismissal had been set aside in the First Appellate Court and decree has been granted in favour of the plaintiff-respondent.

3. The suit was filed by the plaintiff-respondent for declaration of his right, title and interest in respect of the suit property which appertains to Dag No. 1300 and 1301 under Khata No. 187 of village Jaridih Pachamba. It is the admitted case of the parties that Rangu Gaddi and Mithu Gaddi were jointly recorded as Basatu right over Khata No. 187 having various plots and Dag numbers. The Khata was recorded under joint names of Rangu Gaddi and Mithu Gaddi, but according to the plaintiff, although Khata was in joint name but the Survey Authorities recorded separate possession of Rangu Gaddi and Mithu Gaddi in the remarks column in a number of plots and some plots remained joint. The plaintiff has claimed his right over the suit plots on the basis of his purchase from the share of Mithu Gaddi.

4. Mithu Gaddi died leaving behind four sons, namely, Maqbul, Ajij, Subhan and Sultan. Except Sultan all the three sons died intestate and the whole share of Mithu Gaddi have been inherited by Sultan. Sultan also died leaving behind two sons, Yusuf and Ismail. Yusuf had two daughters, but both the daughters died intestate during the life time of Yusuf and then Yusuf also died leaving behind on heirs except his brother Ismail. So, the whole share of Mithu was inherited by Ismail, Ismail left behind four sons, namely. Asagar Mustafa, Muslim and Mustakim.

It is the case of the plaintiff that Md. Ismail Gaddi during his life time left village Jaridih Pachambha in the year 1965 but he used to look after the landed property of Jaridh Pachambha by coming and going from Purlia. After the death of Ismail Gaddi, his four sons also adopted the same policy and accordingly cultivation work was being done by the sons of Ismail Gaddi. Sons of Ismail Gaddi felt that it was not possible for them to keep possession of the suit property alongwith others by living at Purlia and they expressed their desire to sale out the lands and, therefore, they appointed and nominated one Md. Shalim son of Md. Ibrahim Gaddi, who happens to be a share holders from the lineage of Rangu Gaddi as their lawful attorney for transferring the lands bearing plot Nos. 1300 and 1301 and some other plots. The said power of attorney was a registered one dated 21.10.1986. The said attorney Md. Shalim son of Ibrahim transferred the suit plots alongwith some other plots in favour of Md. Asagar through a registered deed dated 31.10.1986 for a consideration of Rs. 7,000.00 . As such according to the plaintiff, he acquired valid right, title and interest over the suit plots. It is the further case of the plaintiff that the defendant No. 1 who happens to be the wife of defendant No. 2 purchased a plot Nos. 1302 and 1304 of Khata No. 187 and disputed plots 1300 and 1301 lies on western boundary and southern boundary of their purchased plots. In the month of August, 1986, defendants encroached the suit lands in the absence of the sons of Ismail Gaddi. According to the plaintiff, the cause of action of suit arose in the month of August, 1986 when the defendants had encroached the suit land and also in the first week of November, 1986 when the plaintiff protested regarding expansion of the existing construction and its further construction and encroachment thereof into the purchased land of the plaintiff. When the defendant did not pay heed to the protest made by the plaintiff, the suit was filed.

5. Defendants took various pleas in the written statement co