N.L.Untwalia, J.

1. This second appeal by the plaintiffs has arisen under the fallowing facts and circumsances. There are two plots of land bearing numbers 1766 and 1769, portions of which are in dispute in this case. According to the survey khatian, the area of plot No. 1766 was 1 katha 18 dhurs and plot No. 1769, which is to the south of plot No. 1766, had an area of 4 kathas 16 dhurs. They appertained to touzi No. 2845 under gairmazarua malik khata No. 82. Plot 1766 contained a house and sahan of the maliks, the ancestors and predecessors-in-interest of the pro forma defendants.

The principal defendants in the suit are defendants 1 to 3. Plot 1769 was a parti piece of land belonging to the said maliks. By a collectorate partition, the entire plot No. 1766 and the western portion of plot No. 1769 measuring 3 kathas, 12 dhurs fell in tauzi No. 15477, the 16 annas maliks of which, on partition, were the predecessors-in-interest of the pro forma defendants. The remaining 1 katha 4 dhurs of plot No. 1769 was allotted to tauzi No. 15474, the 16 annas proprietors of which were the plaintiffs. In a rough sketch map appended to the plaint, that portion of plot No. 1769 which fell