As per case facts, the Applicant challenged a Trial Court order directing him to restore possession of a bungalow and outhouses to the Plaintiffs under Section 6 of the Specific ... Relief Act. The Plaintiffs claimed ownership via a Gift Deed and asserted the Applicant's father, and later the Applicant, were watchmen allowed to reside in one outhouse, but the Applicant trespassed into the main bungalow. The Applicant contended long-term possession of the entire property. The question arose whether the Trial Court correctly determined the Plaintiffs' settled possession and the Applicant's dispossession within the summary scope of a Section 6 suit, especially given the Applicant's admitted presence. Finally, the High Court found the Trial Court's findings, supported by evidence of Plaintiffs conducting repairs, to be unexceptionable. It reiterated that caretakers do not acquire settled possession despite long occupation. The Revision Application was dismissed, affirming the possession order, but allowing the Applicant time to vacate the premises.