Ex.A1 which is a registered document through which her husband settled 5 cents in S.F.No.178/22 in favour of her. Exs.A2 to A6 are the chitta, adangal and natham Nilavari Thittam Thaya chitta and those documents reveal that the plaintiff is able to establish that by way of Ex.A1 settlement deed now the property is transferred in her name and under the settlement deed scheme, she is also paying tax for entire property and as per the field map S.F.No.178/22 was allotted to the plaintiff. Though, the plaintiff claims 5 cents in S.F.No.178/22, as per Commissioner report C1 and C2 on ground she is having only 4.43 cents (1893 sq ft) and the same was measured through Surveyor. Hence, as per the Commissioner report as well as the Surveyor report, on ground, the plaintiff is having only 1893 sq ft including the extent of 438 sq ft in 'B' scheduled property which was said to be encroached by the defendant. The said 438 sq ft the alleged encroachment portion shown as red colour in the Commissioner report which reveals that 438 sq ft encroached by the defendant admittedly which is now in the occupation of the defendant. Hence, through the Commissioner report the plaintiff is able to establish that the extent of 438 sq ft as ''B” scheduled property was encroached by the defendant and enjoyed the same along with her property in S.F.No.178/23 argued that the Courts below had rightly 7
