Heard the learned counsel for the appellants.

2. The defendants are the appellants in this appeal against the judgment and decree of affirmance granting the decree to the plaintiff as prayed.

3. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that the decree passed in eviction suit is not binding on the plaintiff and further prayed for restoration of possession as well as decree for mesne profits from the date of possession and recovery of possession.

4. The plaintiff’s case in short was that he was in occupation of the suit premises as tenant of the defendants on monthly rent of Rs.200/- per month and was running a hair cutting saloon in suit premises. It has been further case of the plaintiff that the defendants forcibly evicted him from the suit premises while executing the decree for recovery of possession passed in T.S.No.101/1993 against some other persons. It was further case of the plaintiff that though the defendants initially agreed to restore possession of the plaintiff over the suit premises but later on they refused. The defendants in the written statement accepted the tenancy of the plaintiff over the suit premises but came out with the case that the plaintiff vol