Per Wizir J.-This is the plaintiffs appeal and arises out of a suit for declaration that the property described in the plaint is Wakf property and belongs to the Takiya Sain Ishaq Ali situate on Wazarat road Jammu. The plaintiff alleged that the property described in the plaint has been a waqf property and had been in possession of the Takiya for a very long time and that the Nazool Department has been taking proceedings to eject the plaintiff and therefore they have brought the suit for this declaration. They further prayed that the Nazool Department has no right to interfere with their possession. The defendant resisted the suit on the ground that the land which belongs to Takiyo Sain Ishaq Ali is only 6708 square feet. The plaintiff has encroached upon the land and the remaining land on which he has encroached does not belong to the Takiya. The trial Court of Senior Subordinate Judge struck various issues and issue. No. 3 " Does the area in dispute besides that marked as J. K. L. and M. in the map Ex. P.A., belong to the plaintiff ?" is material for the disposal of this case. After considering the evidence adduced by the parties the trial Court came to the conclusion that the land measuring 6708 square feet only belongs to the Takiya and the rest of the land, has been encroached upon by the plaintiff. It further found that the plaintiff has failed to establish his title by adverse possession on the land on which he has encroached. The plaintiffs suit was accordingly dismissed.

In this appeal the sole question for determination is whether the plaintiff has established his title to the land besides 6708 square feet. The learned counsel for the appellant has taken us through the evidence produced by the parties and has argued that the land was in Abadi Deh and it was under possession of the plaintiff for more than 50 years. It has been further argued that the land did not belong to the defendant and therefore the defendant had no right to take droceedings of ejectment against the plaintifl. The counsel for the defendant-respondent has drawn our attention to a Judicial Circular No. 108 on page 259 of the Judicial Circulars Part I. In this circular an Irshad of His Highness has been reproduced in which it has been stated that the land in Jammu belongs to His Highness. From this circular it is clear that there is a presumption that the land belongs to the Government and as the plaintiff had averred in the plaint that the land was waqf property and belonged to the Takeya the burden was on the plaintiff to show that this land was waqf property and belonged to the Takiya. The plaintiff has produced oral evidence to show that the Takiya was in possession of this property for a very long time. No definite date is given by these witnesses Some of the witnesses of the plaintiff have deposed that only the area within the boundary wall belonged to the Takiya. The plaintiffs witnesses had deposed that the boundary wall was constructed by Ishak Ali one of the Takiyadars. In 1989 M. Siraj Din the then Tehsildar of Jammu had made a report that the plaintiff had encroached upon the land. The original map prepared by Miran Bux Overseen marked Ex. D. a/i has been produced. This map was drawn in the year 1961. It has been proved by the evidence of Vasudev and P. Sudarshan a record-keeper of the Municipality. This map shows as to what was the exact area which belonged to the Takiya. Another map was prepared in the year 1989 which goes to show the area which was encroached upon by the plaintiff. The plaintiff has failed to show-that this area which was encroached upon belonged to the Takiya and was waqf property. As pointed out above the burden of proving that the area was waqf property lay heavily upon the plaintiff. This he has failed to discharge. From the evidence of Sundar Das Patwari it appears that a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document