JUDGMENT :

Defendants 5, 6 and 11 in O.S.No.111/1989 on the files of the Munsiff Court, Ponnani, are the appellants in this appeal, filed under Section 100 and Order XLII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, ‘the C.P.C.’ hereinafter). They assail the decree and judgment in the above suit, dated 31.1.2006 and the decree and judgment of the appellate court in A.S.No.27/2006, dated 6.11.2020, arose therefrom.

2. Respondents herein are the plaintiffs and the other defendants.

3. Heard Sri.Krishnanunni, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants and Sri.P.Chandrasekar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. As per order, dated 23.3.2021, my learned predecessor admitted this appeal formulating the following substantial question of law:

Whether the two courts below are justified in appreciating the findings of the Land Tribunal with regard to the effects, nature and transaction in obtaining the lease from Bhattathiripad?

5. Originally, suit was filed seeking recovery of possession of the plaint schedule property, based on title and also for permanent prohibitory injunction. The case put up by the plaintiffs before the trial court was that, the plaint schedule property or