RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

1. The suit is ripe for framing of issues.

2. The counsel for the plaintiff and the counsel for both the defendants have handed over proposed issues which are taken on record.

3. The counsels have been heard on the framing of issues.

4. The plaintiff has instituted this suit for recovery of possession of immovable property and for recovery of Rs. 1,95,00,000/- from the defendants on account of damages. It is, inter alia, the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff was a tenant under the defendants in the said immovable property and the defendants, without recourse to law, have forcibly taken possession of the property from the plaintiff and thereby causing loss of infrastructure and movable property of the plaintiff of the value of Rs. 1,25,00,000/- and loss due to interruption of business of Rs. 70 lacs to the plaintiff.

5. The defendants in their proposed issues have placed the onus of proving dispossession on the plaintiff. However, on enquiry that since the defendants also admit tenancy and there is no document of delivery of possession, why should the onus be on the defendants to prove delivery of possession by the plaintiff, the counsel for the de