( 1 ) THESE arc three appeals against the order of the learned Additional Senior Sub Judge Delhi dated June 5, 1968. This judgment will govern them all.

( 2 ) THE facts arc these. The plaintiffs who are now the respondents in the appeal brought three suits for ejectment and recovery of rent and damages. The plaintiffs alleged that they were the owners of a part of Khasra No. 645/581 situated in Chandrawal Jaidid near Delhi. It was alleged that the defendants who arc the appellants now had constructed mud huts on the part of the khasra belonging to the plaintiffs. It was further alleged that the possession of the defendants commenced in 1949 and they agreed to pay rent.

( 3 ) IN all the three suits the plaintiffs are the same The defendants are different persons. Mangal Singh alias Mangtu is the defendant in one suit. Nanua and Naurang are the defendants in the second suit. Harphool and Jaidev arc the defendants in the third suit.

( 4 ) THE plaintiffs alleged that Mangal Singh had agreed to Pay Rs. 2. 00 as rent. Similarly Harphool and Jaidcv had agreed to pay Rs. 2. 00 pecr month, they said. Nanua and Naurang had agreed to pay Rs. 3. 00 per month as rent accordingly to