1195.txt

The current document is an appeal by the appellant against a judgment in a civil lawsuit involving colliery owners in India. The plaintiffs accused the defendants of encroaching on their coal land and removing coal, which the defendants denied. The lower courts found that the disputed extent fell within the defendants' holding based on lease deeds and maps, and the plaintiffs did not have knowledge of the encroachment until 1941. The appellant disputed this finding, claiming knowledge since 1932. The case also involved issues of incorporating maps into lease deeds and the importance of relying on self-contained maps rather than reconstructing them with reference to revenue records. The courts upheld the lower courts' findings, accepting the boundary lines and finding that the suit was not barred by limitation. The respondents claimed that the coal left in the encroached area was entirely lost to them due to being rendered unworkable by statutory obligations, and the appellant's appeal was dismissed with costs. The judgment also touched on the burden of proof in such cases and the role of evidence in establishing knowledge of the defendant's possession of the converted property. The courts held that the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to establish that they first learned of the defendant's possession of the property within three years of the suit, and the defendant has to prove that the fact that the property was in their possession became known to the plaintiff more than three years prior to the suit.