ORDER :

E.S. Venkataramiah, J.

1. After hearing appellant No. 1 Shyamkunwar Giri, who is present in person, we are satisfied that the judgment of the High Court dismissing their petition under Article 227 of the Constitution does not warrant an interference. In the present case, respondent No. 4 Jaikaran Baldev Singh brought suits for ejectment of the appellants from the chawls in question in the City Civil Court, Bombay way back in 1969 and both the suits were decreed after contest in 1983 i.e. after a lapse of 14 years, holding that they be ranked trespassers. The appeals preferred by the appellants to the High Court were summarily rejected. They then took out chamber summons in the City Civil Court for a declaration that the decrees were a nullity and incapable of execution and upon that basis obtained ad interim injunction. Both the chamber summons were dismissed on contest and the injunction vacated. The appellants went up in revision before the High Court but the revisions were dismissed summarily. Thereafter, the appellants brought suits in the City Civil Court, Bombay for a declaration that the decrees had been fraudulently obtained, null and void and inexecutable. The said