T. S. THAKUR, J.

( 1 ) THIS Regular First Appeal has been filed by the appellant against a mere finding recorded by the trial court on Issue No. 3 in a suit for possession and recovery of compensation for use and occupation of the suit premises. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that even when the suit filed against the appellant had been dismissed by the trial court and the decree was in his favour, the defendant appellant was entitled to maintain the present appeal and question the correctness of the adverse finding on Issue no. 3 recorded by the trial court. That is not, in our opinion, the correct legal position. Before we state the reasons for our saying so we may briefly recount the factual matrix in which the question arises for our consideration.

( 2 ) THE trial court had on the pleadings of the parties framed the following three issues for determination:-

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the possession of the first floor of property No. B-2/6, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi from the defendant?opp

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover damages for use and occupation of the said premises from the defendant? If so, at what rate and for what period? O