9.On the side of the respondent, in order to prove his possession he filed patta issued in the name of the temple Ex.A.1. Wherein, his name also mentioned. Apart from that he produced Ex.A2 to Ex.A4 kist receipts to show his immediate possession. He also produced the Certificate issued by the Village Administrative Officer to prove his possession. Apart from that, the First Appellate Court relied on the admission made by the appellant's own witness namely, D.W.6, who admitted that the respondent was in possession of the suit property 10 years back. Therefore, the past possession of the respondent/plaintiff was admitted by the appellant's own witness. In order to prove immediate possession of the respondent, he produced the kist receipts namely, Ex.A2 to Ex.A4. The appellant, who was examined as D.W.1, during his cross-examination admitted that he did not know the extent of the suit property. Further, though he pleaded tenancy arrangement, he failed to prove the same by leading any evidence. He also failed to file any revenue documents like kist receipts to prove his possession over the suit property. In these circumstances, the First Appellate Court has arrived at the factual findings that the respondent/plaintiff has proved his possession and dismissed the suit. The said factual finding is based on evidence available on record. No perversity is pointed out in the approach of First Appellate Court in
