Learned counsel for the petitioner has, however, submitted that in terms of the Jamabandi for the year 1991 (Annexure-P.5), the petitioner is recorded in possession of land measuring 2 Kanals 16 Marlas which according to him means that the petitioner in addition to 1 Kanal land in his possession, he is in possession of 1 Kanal 16 Marlas of more land. However, the learned counsel has not been able to show as to how the petitioner came in possession of the said further land and whether the additions and corrections made by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Nabha vide order dated 24.1.1989 (Annexure-P.3) also pertains to the said land measuring 1 Kanal 16 Marlas comprised in Khasra No.508 Min. It is quite apparent that the petitioner is basing his claim only on the observations of the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade as recorded in his order dated 24.1.1989 (Annexure-P.3), which in any case has been set aside. Otherwise there is nothing to establish his possession or as to what is the foundation or basis of the same. Besides, the Civil Court has categorically held that the petitioner is not in possession. Therefore, the revenue authorities have rightly followed the order of the Civil Court, which they are even otherwise bound to follow under the law.
