The demarcation of land must be done in accordance with the law, and reports submitted by Local Commissioners can be upheld as reliable evidence.

SHEKHER DHAWAN, J.

Present Regular Second Appeal is directed against the concurrent findings of both the Courts below, whereby, suit filed by the plaintiffs [respondents herein] for possession of the suit property was decreed by the Court of First Instance vide judgment and decree dated 11.06.1987. The appeal filed by the present appellants was dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Bhiwani vide judgment and decree dated 28.04.1988.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties are being referred to as per their status before the Court of first Instance.

3. Relevant facts of the case for the purpose of decision of this appeal; that the plaintiffs filed a suit for possession in respect of the suit land comprising in Khewat No. 121, Khatoni No. 371 and Khasra No. 376 measuring 29 Bigahs 2 Biswas, situated within the revenue estate of Village Sandwa, Tehsil Siwani, District Bhiwani owned by the plaintiffs and proforma respondents. Chandgi died and thereafter plaintiff and proforma respondents and their legal heirs were impleaded. Defendants are also residents of the same village – Sandwa and their land is in the abadi which is adjoining the agricultural land of the plaintiffs and is comprised in Khasra No. 376. The plaintiffs suspected that the defendants may encroach upon their land and got the demarcation done through Tehsildar with the help of Kanungo. Spot inspection was done by the Kanungo on 27.8.1982 and the report was submitted and it was found that the defendants were in unauthorized possession on the part of agricultural land of the plaintiffs as shown in letters ABCD in red colour, measuring 1 Bigha and 4 Biswas. Request was made to the defendants to remove the unauthorized possession over the suit land, but to no effect and as such necessity of the suit.

4. Defendants took the plea that they were not in unauthorized possession of the suit land and prayed that the suit be dismissed.

5. On the pleadings of the parties, issues were framed and after appreciating the entire evidence brought on record by the parties, the Court of First instance decreed the suit of the plaintiffs that they are entitled to the possession of the land measuring 19 Biswas of khasra No. 376 as given in the report of Naib Tehsildar [Ex.PW3/2]. Defendants were also directed to remove their malbafrom the said land as they were found to be in illegal possession of the suit land. The defendants preferred an appeal before the Court of first Appeal but remained unsuccessful and as such, the present Regular Second Appeal before this Court.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the Courts below have not considered the controversy in its correct perspective because there was absolutely no evidence on record to hold that the land in possession of the appellants-defendants is part of khasra No. 376. He has also submitted that though, the land was demarcated twice, i.e., once by the Kanungo [PW2] and second time by the Naib Tehsildar [PW3], the demarcation report was not in accordance with the rules framed under the Land Revenue Act because the Girdawar Kanungo and the Naib Tehsildar had not located three 'PuccaPoints' to demarcate the land in dispute. They simply demarcated the land on the basis of some dolwhich could not be considered to be correct because the land has to be measured after locating three 'puccapoints'. It has also been in the statement of revenue officials, who visited the spot, that they failed to locate three pucca points and as such, the report submitted by the revenue officials cannot be made the basis for holding the appellants to be in unauthorized possession. Naib Tehsildar, as Local Commissioner, demarcated the land from some points known as 'Saheda'. So, there is absolutely no reliable evidence to hold that the demarcation had been done according to the rules and the procedure laid down under the Punjab Land Revenue Act. As per Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Orders, Vol. I in cases of 'HaddShikni' i.e