Jhaveri, J.

By way of this appeal, the appellants have challenged the judgment and order dated 28.04.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed as withdrawn the first appeal filed by the original plaintiff and rejected the application under Order 22, Rule 10 read with Rule 11 CPC which was filed by the present appellants.

2. The facts of the case, according to the appellants, are as under:

2.1. There is temple of Mahadev Ji at Janta Colony, Jaipur. It was Gaddi of Sawai Pav Maharaj. The erstwhile State of Rajasthan allotted 11 Bighas and 19 Biswa land situated around the temple for temple & Bagichi, in the year Samvat 1935 (equivalent to 1878). After Sawai Pav, Bhagwati Pav became holder of the Gaddi. Bhagwati Pav was controlling two temples, one at village Niwai (Tonk) and another temple of Mahadev Ji at Sawai Pav ki Bagichi, Janta Colony, outside Ghaat Gate, Jaipur.

2.2. He was having two Chelas; one of them was male Samudri Pav who was looking after the temple of Mahadev Ji and its property at Sawai pav ki Bagichi, Janta Colony, Jaipur. Both Samudri Pav and Manji Moti Nath executed a gift deed on 25.07.1914 in favour of Cheli Manji Shanker Nath who died on Mah Posh, 1971 at the age of 100 years. Both the contesting persons, namely; Sarvari Pav (plaintiff) and Chandrama Pav (defendant) claimed to have inherited the properties of Gaddi Mahadev Ji at Sawai Pav ki Bagichi, Janta Colony, Jaipur, from Cheli Manji Shanker Nath. According to plaintiff Sarvari Pav, Chandrama Pav ousted him from said property being Chela of Manji Shanker Nath because he got married and as per the custom of the Gaddi, married person could not be Chela.

2.3. As per plaintiff Sarvari Pav, Manji Sanker Nath during her lifetime, executed a registered Will in his favour, first time on 02.08.1967 and second time registered Will on 04.11.1969. The occasion for executing the second registered Will arose because the first was burnt to ash.

2.4. The defendant Chandrama Pav without any authority, sold some of the properties of the Sawai pav Ki Bagichi, Jaipur Gaddi, on 25.01.1964 to the defendants No. 12 to 15 (Gelda family) of suit No. 19/1980. Initially mutation was entered in the names of dead person namely Samudri Pav but later on the same was cancelled by the Collector vide order dated 20.08.1990.

2.5. All other consequential mutations in the names of Chandrama Pav & Galda family were cancelled. The order of the Collector was further upheld by the Board of Revenue vide order dated 5/8/2000 and the same has attained finality as it was not further challenged. As such, the revenue record of the land in question remained as it was.

2.6. The present dispute pertains to the two suits filed by the plaintiff Sarvari Pav. The first suit No. 79/1978 which was renumbered as 19/1980 after transfer to the Court of A.D.J., was for possession. In the suit, it was prayed that the plaintiff Sarvari Pav may be declared as owner of the property mentioned in para 1 of the plaint and the sale executed by the defendant Chandrama Pav in favour of the other defendants No. 2 to 39 may be declared as void and ineffective as against the plaintiff.

2.7. It was further prayed that the plaintiff may be put into possession upon whole of the land mentioned in para 1 of the plaint. The sale dated 25.01.1964 made by the defendant Chandrama Pav in favour of other defendants No. 12 to 15, was also under challenge.

2.8. The second suit No. 238/1979 was filed for declaration and injunction with regard to the land sold through agreement to sale on 22.07.1967 by the defendant Chandrama Pav to Mohan Lal and Laxmi Narain who were the defendants No. 2 and 3. Vide agreement to sale dated 22.07.1967, 375 sq yds. land was sold. That piece of land had already been sold through an agreement to sale by Manji Shanker Nath to Chhota Devi on 21.07.1967. But the agreement to sale stood cancelled as the purchaser did not pay rest of the consideration nor got executed