' RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.---Petitioners seek leave to appeal against Lahore High Court judgment, dated 23-6-1999 in Civil Revision No.381-D of 1983 dismissing the same and affirming the judgments and decrees by the trial Court as well as First Appellate Court.
2. Petitioners filed a suit for declaration of title on the basis of oral sale and alternatively for ownership on the basis of adverse possession. At the trial they could not establish the same, as there was no adequate evidence to prove any lawful sale in their favour. Likewise, they could not substantiate their claim of adverse possession with the consequence that the suit as also the appeal did not succeed. Their civil revision also did not bear fruit, hence this petition.
3. On petitioners' counsel's own statement, petitioners have been recorded as `Ghair Dakheelkar' in the Jamabandi Register since 1937-38, which would reflect that they were tenants-at-will. In law, a tenant cannot raise the plea of title against real owner, therefore, in our considered view, the petitioners were legally not entitled to a decree with regard to their title on the basis of adverse possession. There are concurrent findings by three Courts below, including the High Court, which do not suffer from any legal or factual infirmity or jurisdictional error. We, therefore, do. Not find any merit in the petition, which is accordingly dismissed and leave to appeal refused. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.