( 1 ) POINTS arising for determination in these two appeals are identical, therefore, the same are being disposed of by common order. Learned counsel for the parties were heard at length both on question of condonation of delay in filing appeals and on merits of the appeals and we propose to dispose of the same by a common order. Facts in both the appeals are almost identical. Wherever necessary reference will be made to individual case, otherwise facts are being narrated from the record of rfa (OS) No. 35 of 2000 and the civil suit out of which this appeal has arisen.

( 2 ) ASHOK Nagar Welfare Association claiming to be a society registered under the societies Registration Act, 1860 filed two separate suits in the Original Side of this court in the month of January, 1991. Suits were registered as Suit No. 544 of 1991 and Suit No. 597 of 1991. In the first suit (S. No. 544/91) decree for possession was claimed against 48 defendants alleged to be unauthorised occupants of plots/ houses Nos. 99 to 174 being a plot of land measuring about 12 bighas being part of khasra No. 393/264, out of 151 bighas and 15 biswas situate in Ashok Nagar, Delhi as per site plan. It was alleged that the Society was the owner and in actual possession of 151 bighas 15 biswas of land comprised in khasra No. 391/263,392/ 264, 393/264 and 402/268 situate in Ashok Nagar, Village Chilla, Delhi since the year 1980. Earlier to the Society coming into being, its members were in physical possession of the land having set up their tenements and semibuilt up structures thereupon. It became difficult for each and every member of the Society to safeguard their respective interest, therefore, they jointly and severally agreed to relinquish their respective rights in favour of the Society, after the Society was constituted and took various steps to safeguard and secure the interest in the land or being illegally encroached upon and grabbed either by Governmental agencies or private individual. Writ petition No. 1507/94 is alleged to have been filed against Union of India, Delhi administration, Delhi Development Authority etc. in addition it is alleged that suit No. 273/86 was filed against previous owners of the land. In the said suit order of status quo as regards possession was passed and the defendants therein were restrained from transferring or alienating the said land, in any manner whatsoever, which order of restraint was confirmed on 5/8/1986. Vide judgment dated 12/11/1987 said suit was decreed against the said previous owner. Plaintiffs further claimed that 48 defendants (in suit No. 544/91) were trespassers, intruders and unauthorised occupants on the land in dispute, who had been inducted by the previous owners against whom suit No. 273/86 had been filed. Therefore, they have no right, title or interest in the land in dispute and being unauthorised occupants are liable to be removed therefrom. It was alleged that on 10/1/1991 the plaintiffs were dispossessed by the defendants, which led to filing of an FIR against the said defendants. As status of the defendants was that of unauthorised occupants on the land, therefore, the plaintiff claimed that in terms of Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, they were liable to be evicted therefrom by a decree in accordance with law.

( 3 ) ON similar facts the other Suit No. 597/91 was also instituted in the month of january, 1991 against 52 defendants stating that they were unauthorised occupants on plot/houses No. 65 to 98 from out of khasra No. 393/264 of the aforementioned property, who on 22/1/1990 and 25/11/1990 had deliberately dispossessed the plaintiff Association, which had led them to file an FIR. Consequently, decree for possession was claimed. Both the suits were taken up separately. Defendants were proceeded against ex parte. Ex parte decree was passed in Suit No. 544 of 1991 on 27/1/1997 and in suit No. 597 of 1991 on 6/8/1997.

( 4 ) ON 12/4/2000 R. F. A. Nos. 14 and 15 of 2000 were filed