the plain(cid:10)ff claims to have acquired occupancy rights under the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887; and, by opera(cid:10)on of Punjab Occupancy Tenants (Ves(cid:10)ng of Proprietary Rights) Act, 1953, to have become owner of the suit land.

4. The defendant did not appear before the trial Court despite service by publica(cid:10)on and was proceeded against ex parte. The plain(cid:10)ff examined himself and one suppor(cid:10)ng witness and produced jamabandis from 1964–65 onwards to substan(cid:10)ate his claim.

5. Both the Courts below, upon apprecia(cid:10)on of pleadings and evidence, have concurrently held that the plain(cid:10)ff failed to establish acquisi(cid:10)on of occupancy rights and consequently dismissed the suit.

6. This Court has heard learned counsel for the appellant and carefully perused the record.

7. The en(cid:10)re edifice of the plain(cid:10)ff’s claim rests upon acquisi(cid:10)on of occupancy rights under the Punjab Tenancy Act. Under Sec(cid:10)on 5(2) of the Act, a tenant seeking to establish such right must prove con(cid:10)nuous occupa(cid:10)on for thirty years and payment of rent not exceeding the amount of land revenue and rates and cesses. Sec(cid:10)on 8, b