and 2262 plaintiff alongwith Nand Singh are owners in possession of 1/2 share (1/4 share each) out of these Khasra numbers…’. It is evident from the above that Thakkar Singh and Nand Singh both acknowledged that their rights extended only to half the share of Khasra No.2259. 17. It is unclear from the record as to whether the portion of Khasra No.2259 styled ‘NOPQ’ by the final decree is the very same plot of land granted to the LRs of Mukand Singh by the warrant of possession dated 21st September 1985, or not. Till and such time a clear determination in this regard is made, this dispute cannot be put to rest since there is no dispute as to the entitlement of one-fourth share. It is only, what part of the land constitutes the respective one- fourth share which has led to the present judgment being passed. The respondents herein have alleged that the warrant of possession is a ‘self prepared 24-SLP(C) 9202-9204 OF 2016document’ and ‘not genuine’ since there was no demarcation of