The expression "title" conveys different forms of right to a property, which can include a right to possess such property

 In the Matter of Nagen Hazarika (Deceased) ... vs Smt. Manorama Sharma AIR 2007 Gau 62 it was held by the Gauhati High court that "Title" is a broad expression in law, which need not always be understood as akin to ownership. The expression "title" conveys different forms of right to a property, which can include a right to possess such property….”

Supreme Court - The entries in jamabandi are not proof of title

 In Corporation of the City of Bangalore v. M. Papaiah and another (1989) 3 SCC 612 it was held that

 “it is firmly established that revenue records are not documents of title, and the question of interpretation of document not being a document of title is not a question of law.” 

In Guru Amarjit Singh v. Rattan Chand and others (1993) 4 SCC 349 The Supreme Court has held that 

“that the entries in jamabandi are not proof of title”. 

In State of Himachal Pradesh v. Keshav Ram and others (1996), 11 SCC 257 this Court held that 

“The entries in the revenue papers, by no stretch of imagination can form the basis for the declaration of title in favour of the plaintiff.”