defendants have purchased immoveable property admeasuring 0-06-60 HR and in that Survey, there is 0-64-60 HR land which is good for cultivation while 0-12-90 land is barren land. As per 7/12 extract, immoveable property purchased by defendants is described as cultivable lad and all the barren land sands in the name of one Sil family and the plaintiffs do not stake their claim of ownership qua any property in the said Survey land. The landed property of the plaintiffs is in Survey No.48/2/G. The 7/12 extract of both the Survey numbers was brought on record before the Appellate Court. Upon this, the learned Judge rendered a fnding that the claim of the plaintiffs is based on adverse possession and, therefore, it is imperative for them to plead on what date, they came into the possession of the suit property, what was the nature of their possession, whether the factum of possession was adverse and how long the possession has continued, without any disturbance. Recording that a person pleading possession is not entitled for equities in his favour, since he is claiming his possession adverse to that of the true owner, he must establish the factum of adverse possession. By referring to the pleadings which are without any details and merely contain an averment that the plaintiffs are in possession of the suit property, since 1976, the learned Judge return a fnding of fact that the plaintiffs have their property located in Survey No.48/2/G, which is adjacent to Survey No.48/2/A and to be more specifc, and adjacent to west boundary of the suit property, the house of the plaintiffs is located. Admittedly, there being no demarcation between the two Survey numbers, the Court Commissioner had carried out the work of
