1. - S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 1317/99 was filed by the plaintiff against the defendants for deleting issue No. 4 framed in the suit No. 17/99. Three issues relating to res judicata, limitation and locus standi of the plaintiff was framed where as the 4th additional issue as framed was about the jurisdiction of the court.

2. The respondent ladies had appeared and had stated that 'for the reason that they, the defendants, are being harassed since so many decades and for expediating the suit had no objection if the issue No. 4 is to be deleted as desired by the opposite party, an order was passed accordingly.

3. S.B. Civil Misc. Application No. 44/2000 was moved in the revision petition with the prayer that for the reason that the plaintiff Abdul Rahman had lost his case right upto High Court and he had started third round of litigation, therefore, prayer was made for a direction to the civil court to decide the suit as early as possible. It was even mentioned by the applicant Prasony Bai that having been frustrated because of such type of litigation, she is even prepared to sell the land to the plaintiff at reasonable market price to end the litigation once for all.

4. While having arguments on the misc. application, this court was of the opinion that the judicial process is being abused by one or the other party and, therefore, this court had suo moto ordered that the record of the trial court be summoned immediately to pass appropriate order in this regard for which even the parties had no objections.

5. The parties were directed to give the complete details along with issues which were to be decided for the purpose of transferring the case to this court. Following are the facts.

(i) Mangal Singh and his daughter Prasony Bai were displaced persons from Pakistan; (ii) Mangal Singh was allotted land measuring 11 Bigha 16 Biswa in village Shorba Tehsil Kishangarh Bas District Alwar; (iii) Mangal Singh died; (iv) Prasony Bai started cultivating the land; (v) on 31.3.1978 Patwari made a report that Mangal Singh had died in-estate; (vi) on 12.3.1979 escheet proceedings were initiated by the Tehsildar Kishangarhbas; (vii) On 28.3.1979 possession was taken by Patwari from Prasony Bai; (viii) On 11.5.1979 Tehsildar allotted some land to Abdul Rahman; (ix) on 24.8.1979 Additional Collector set aside the order of taking possession and restored possession to Parsony Bai and cancelled the allotment to Adbul Rahman; (x) On 5.11.1980 appeal filed by Abdul Rahman against the order dated 24.8.1979 was dismissed; (xi) Persony Bai agitated the matter against allotment of land to Abdul Rahman; (xii) On 11.5.1979 allotment in favour of Abdul Rehman was set aside; (xiii) Ultimately the matter went upto Board of Revenue; (xiv) On 28.11.1985 Board of Revenue decided the appeal in favour of Parsony Bai and maintained the order of cancellation of allotment to Abdul Rahman; (xv) S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2274/85 filed by Abdul Rahman in the High Court against the order of Board of Revenue; (xvi) On 13.5.1993 writ petition was dismissed and the order of the Board of Revenue became final. (xvii) On 17.2.1985 sanad issued in favour of respondent Parsony Bai; (xviii) On 31.5.1993 mutation in favour of Parsony Bai was opened; (xix) the matter was agitated by Abdul Rahman; (xx) On 12.6.1996 Board of Revenue rejected revision of Abdul Rahman; (xxi) On 14.6.1999 review application was dismissed by Board of Revenue.

6. From the above narration of facts, the matter stood decided finally in regard to cancellation of allotment of Abdul Rahman and also mutations in favour of Parsony Bail; the litigation started in the year 1979 and ended on 14.6.1999 i.e. in two bouts of litigation.

7. Having failed in previous litigations, the present suit No. 17/99 has been filed by Abdul Rahman with the prayer to declare that Parsony Bai is not the daughter of Mangal Singh and Sanad allotted to her in February 1986 is illegal and that the plaintiff Abdul Rahman is in