In a suit for possession of immovable property based on title, the plaintiff is only required to prove title. The onus shifts to the defendant to prove adverse possession for more than 12 years before the suit.

B. P. Singh, J. - The plaintiff is the appellant. She filed Title Suit No. 73 of 1971 in the court of Munsif, Ranchi, for declaration of title in respect of the suit land measuring an area of one katha six chhataks out of M. S. Plot no. 2321 in ward no. 7 situate at Purulia road, Ranchi, demarcated in the schedule attached to the plaint. The suit lands comprise a portion of sub-plot no. 7 of plot no. 2321 as also the passage adjacent thereto. The plaintiff claimed title to the suit lands and alleged that the defendant/respondent was an encroacher who had no title whatsoever. She claimed khas possession of the suit land after evicting the defendant therefrom. The suit was contested by the defendant. The learned Munsif, Ranchi, by his judgment dated 11.3.1978 and decree dated 21.3.78 dismissed the suit. On appeal, the Addl. Subordinate Judge, Ranchi, in Title Appeal no. 26/10 of 1978-79 by his judgment and decree dated 26th of September, 1979 dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order of the learned Munsif. The appellant preferred Second Appeal no. 251 of 1979(R) before this Court. The second appeal was heard by me and by order dated 6th of April 1989 I allowed the application filed by the appellant before this court under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for amendment of the plaint. The amendment was allowed for the reasons contained in order dated 6.4.1989 and the matter was remitted to the court of the Addl. Subordinate Judge, Ranchi, for permitting the plaintiff/appellant to amend his plaint. The defendant/respondent was also afforded an opportunity of filing additional written statement and after giving opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence on the question of title, the appellate court was required to record its finding on that question and to send the finding to this court. In accordance with the order of this Court, the appellate court has recorded its finding which is contained in judgment dated 31.7.1989. He found that the plaintiff/appellant had established her title while defendant respondent had failed to do so. He, however, did not go into the question of adverse possession as he was not required to go into that question. The matter was, thereafter heard by me. The respondent was permitted to file his memorandum of objection to the findings recorded by the court below and as such a memorandum of objection was filed by the defendant/respondent. The matter was, thereafter, heard at length.

2. The suit giving rise to this appeal was filed on the 7th of April, 1971 by the plaintiff/appellant. In her plaints, she stated that M. S. Plot no. 2321 was held and possessed by Smt. Soubhagya Manjari Devi. She sub-divided the plots into various sub-plots and sold them to different persons. The plaintiff/appellant purchased several sub-plots from the vendees of Smt. Southagya Manjari Devi by registered deeds of sale between the years 1962-64. By reason of such purchases, the plaintiff came in possession of those plots. While sub-dividing the plot into sub-plots, a passage 16' in widh was left by the side of sub-plot nos. 1 to 5 and 7. It appears from the map annexed to the plaint that plot no. 2321 is a big plot. It has been sub-divided into several plots. Plot nos. 6 and 7 about the Purulia Road while plots 1 to 5 are behind these two sub-plots. A passage has been carved out which runs adjacent to plots 1 to 5 and 7.

According to the plaintiff, the defendant/respondent, a tresspasser, encroached over a portion of sub-plot no. 7 and put up a structure over-night to which he went on making improvements. A proceeding u/s. 145 Cr. P. C. was initiated but the same has remained pending for a long time. According to the plaintiff/appellant, the defendant came on the land in or about the year 1968. According to the plaintiff, the defendant recently encroached over a portion of the passage as well and started making some constructions. Thereafter, proceedings were initiated u/s. 144 Cr. P. C. and long