K.M. Dayal, J.

1. THIS is a defendant's appeal. The plaintiff, Mst. Murta Kunwar filed a suit in respect of certain constructions made by the defendant over plot nos. 386, 387 and 327 belonging to her. These plots were renumbered in the year 1961 as plot numbers 507, 508 and 413 respectively. It was alleged that plot no. 507 having an area of 288 links was a grove. Plot No. 508 was a low lying area and was cultivated. Plot No. 507 and 413 area 10 links was the Khudkasht of the plaintiff. Consolidation operation intervened and plot no. 386 and 387 were renumbered as plot no. 179 having an area of 348 links. Plot no. 423 was given a new number as 178 having 10 links as before. The allegation was that the defendant had encroached upon a portion shown in the plan map as A B C D, E F G H and I J K L. The plaintiff claimed removal of the constructions and encroachment of the defendant from the aforesaid plots.

2. THE defence of the appellant was that plot no. 178 was an old low lying land and the plaintiff had nothing to do with it. On the north of that plot there was plot no. 386 which was Banjar and Parti and the defendant was having his Khalihan over it and was using it for oth