ORDER

1. Leave granted.

Heard learned counsel for parties at length.

2. Totally misconceived venture was undertaken by the respondent(s).

3. The appellants preferred Regular Second Appeal being RSA No.218/1982 which was compromised in the High Court and the compromise decree was passed. Mutation was undertaken on the basis thereof and the compromise decree was quoted verbatim in the same.

4. Miscellaneous applications being CM-10635-C of 2004 in CM No.2768 of 2004 were filed in the High Court in connection with RSA No.218/1982 in which the High Court has passed order dated 03.07.2009 and has observed as under:-

"The present case, i.e. RSA No.218/1982 was decided on the basis of a compromise entered into between the parties, i.e. Param Ram and Sahi Ram sons of Jiai Lal on the one hand and Mohinder Pal, Rishi Raj, Anil, Mukesh and Ramesh sons of Haria on the other. The only record which is relevant in the present case is the consent decree dated 3.12.1987, passed by the High Court in RSA No.218 of 1982. On the basis of said decree mutations have duly been sanctioned. I have carefully perused mutation No.2403 dated 22.4.1994, which clearly shows that mutation is being sanctioned on th