( 1 ) THE appellants/defendants (hereinafter referred to as the appellants for the sake of convenience) have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order passed by the first appellate court dated September 1,1973 whereby the judgment and decree passed by the learned lower court were set aside and a decree for possession over the plot shown by red colour in the plan Ex. P8 was passed in favour of the respondents /plainiffs ( hereinafter referred to as the respondents for the sake of brevity ).

( 2 ) BRIEF facts that gave rise to the present appeal are as under:

"that one Shri Amar Nath who was the father of the respondent No. 1 and the husband of the respondent No. 2 purchased plot No. 4790, Roshan Ara Road, Aryapura, Delhi, in a court auction held on January 15,1965. The said auction was subsequently confirmed in favour of the deceased Shri Amar Nath Seth on February 24,1965 by Shri Dalip Singh, Sub Judge 1st Class, Delhi, in a case entitled as Hira Lal Seth v. Shri Amar Nath. On enquiries it was revealed that one Shri Harnam Singh was in an unauthorised occupation over the said plot since January 1962 fully shown by red lines in the plan Ex. P8 annexed with the plaint. The said Shri Amar Nath breathed his last on January 5,1967 and left for his heavenly abode on the said date leaving behind the respondents as his legal heirs. Shri Harnam Singh was duly served with a registered notice to vacate the above-said plot and to hand over the peaceful vacant possession over the same to the respondent and to pay damages for use and occupation of the same. Shri Harnam Singh paid little heed to the said notice. He neither vacated the said plot and delivered its vacant possession over the same to the respondent nor paid damages for its use and occupation. The respondents are entitled to damages for use and occupation of the said plot from January 5,1965 onwards at the rate of Rs. 20. 00 per mensern. A sum of Rs. 295. 00 is due to the respondents from the appellants for the period from January 5,1965 to March 7,1968. However, the respondents claimed a sum of Rs. 200. 00only on the said score. Hence arose the necessity for the institution of the suit. "

( 3 ) SHRI Harnam Singh Sethi, defendant died during the pendency of the suit and the appellants who are his legal heirs were brought on record vide order dated December 8,1971. passed by the learned lower court.

( 4 ) THE appellants put in contest, inter alia, on the following grounds: that the suit is not properly valued for the purposes of court fee and jurisdiction; the appellants are in occupation over the said plot as owners thereof since the partition of the country. They have perfected their-title to the suit property by adyerse possession. It- is false and preposterous that the appellants are in occupation over the disputed property since January 1962. The fact is that Shri Harnam Singh Sethi who was their predecessor - in- interest was a displaced person. He has been in occupation over the disputed property since the year 1957. He had been running a school over the said plot of land in the name of Ashoka High School and was residing therein alongwith his family members. He raised structures on the said plot of land at his own cost consisting of four rooms, a kitchen, a bath room, a latrine and anoffice. The deceased in this way expended a sum of Rs. 10,000. 00 in raising the said structures. The deceased had been paying the house tax and water tax in respect of the said premises and now the same is being paid by the present appellants.

( 5 ) THE learned lower court was of the view that the respondents have perfected their title to the disputed property by adverse possession and as such, the suit was barred. He thus dismissed the suit OH February 23,1973.

( 6 ) ON appeal the learned Additional District Judge reversed the judgment, and decree passed by the lower court. He held the respondents herein entitled to recovery of possession over the plot shown by red lin