1. Defendants in a suit for fixation of boundary and for prohibitory injunction are the appellants. The suit was originally filed against the 1st defendant alone. Subsequently, additional defendants 2 and 3 were impleaded. The trial court held that plot no.1 in Ext.C1(b) plan is the plaintiffs' property and thus fixed the northern and western boundary of the said plot. Prohibitory injunction was granted restraining the defendants from trespassing into plot no.1, shown in Ext. C1(b) plan, and from committing any acts of waste. The appeal filed by the defendants was dismissed, confirming the decree and judgment passed by the trial court.

2. The learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the observations made by the Advocate Commissioner in Ext C1 report will make it undoubtedly clear that plot no.2, shown in Ext.C1(a) plan, is in the possession of the defendants and it was based on that report filed by the Commissioner additional defendants 2 and 3 were impleaded. It is also submitted by the learned counsel that the application I.A. No.3225/2008 was filed by the plaintiffs to implead additional defendants 2 and 3 on the ground that a portion of the property