1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION A.O.NO. 1265/2008 Dukhuram Ananturam Yadav Appellant Vs. Sanyam Realtors P.Ltd. Respondents Mr.H.S.Shreepadmurthy i/b M/s Ravindra Parekh & Co.for appellant Mr.P.S.Dani for the respondents CORAM: S.J.VAZIFDAR,J. DATE : 12th December,2008 P.C. 1] The impugned order warrants no interference. The plaintiff claims to be in possession of eight structures and an unidentified portion of land admeasuring 1906 sq.ft.. The learned Judge has found the plaintiff to be in possession of only one structure admeasuring 130 sq.ft.. Mr.Murthy fairly conceded that the plaint does not contain any contents specifying the land admeasuring 1906 sq.ft. of which the plaintiff/appellant alleges to be a tenant. 2] Even before me Mr.Murthy was unable to indicate in any manner by which this land could be specified. The reference to the sketch Exh.A annexed to the plaint is admittedly a rough sketch to use Mr.Murthy's own words . Mr.Murthy contended that the plaintiff was allowed to keep the buffaloes on the open land . There was , however, no fixed place for keeping the buffaloes . Paragraph 2 of the plaint in fact states that the rent was paid for the occupation of 2 the suit premises on the size of the business, mainly depending on the number of heads of cattle tethered on the suit premises. 3] There are no particulars in this respect. Admittedly due to the revised policy of the Corporation this system has discontinued about 8-10 years ago. Thus it cannot even be said that the plaintiff is in settled possession of the said land. In the circumstances the A.O.is dismissed.