1. These two Appeals arise out of the common Judgment delivered in Regular Civil Appeal No.284 of 1999 and 289 of 199 respectively arising out of the Judgment in Regular Civil Suit No.26 of 1993.

2. The following substantial questions of law arise in these two Appeals:-

(i) Whether the first appellate Court was per se wrong in holding that the suit land Gat Nos. 300, 303 and 309 at Village Budh were exclusive properties of the defendant Nos. 5 to 8 and in allowing the Appeal No.284 of 199 filed by the defendant nos. 5 to 8 and setting aside the Judgment and decree passed by the trial Court in Regular Civil Suit No.26 of 1993?

(ii) Whether the first appellate Court was wrong in allowing the Appeal No.289 of 1999 filed by the original defendant No.1 and setting aside the decree passed by the trial Court in Suit no.26 of 1993 in respect of the suit house Nos. 139 and 47 situated at Vaduj on the ground that the judgment and finding in the earlier Appeal No.304 of 1984 arising out of Regular Civil Suit No.214 of 1975 operated as res judicata against the plaintiff/present appellant?

(iii) Whether the first appellate Court was wrong in reducing the share of the plaintiff/appel