JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J. - With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both the appeals have been heard together as the same are directed against the common judgment dated 30.11.1981 passed by the learned District Judge, Merta, whereby the learned District Judge allowed the appeal of the respondents-defendants and set aside the judgment passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Parbatsar, dated 24.05.1978 whereby the suit filed by the plaintiffs for declaration and permanent injunction and restoration of the possession was decreed and it was held that Mine No.50 is a Mine under the bapi patta and the action of declaring the said Mine as khalsa (vacant) by the Mines Department of the State Government and including the said area in Mine No.50/1 was held to be illegal and the plaintiffs were declared entitled to get the Mine restored by evicting the appellants-defendants. The appellants-defendants were further restrained not to interfere with the possession of Mine No.50 and utilize the said Mine for stone excavation and cutting.

2. While admitting S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.208/1981 - Mangu @ Mangigal and Ors. Versus Abdul Ghani and Ors., on 15.12.1981, this Court framed the following substantial questions of law:-

"1. Whether the Rules of Bapidars and Gairbapidars are applicable to this case?

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned District Judge was not right in granting declaration in regard to quarries in question on the basis of the 'Patta" Ex.1 particularly when it was not got renewed under r. 2 of the Makrana Marble Quarries Rules within the time limit under r. 3 of the Rules thereof."

3. In the second appeal preferred by the State of Rajasthan i.e. S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.61/1982: State of Rajasthan and Anr. Versus Abdul Gani and Ors., on 10.05.2012, this Court while admitting the appeal framed the following questions of law:

"1. Whether the first appellate Court erred in holding that 'Patta' Ex.1 relates to the disputed land in the absence of any evidence on record?

2. Whether the Bapi and Non-Bapi Rules of the erstwhile State of Marwar were applicable to the land in question and Makrana Marble Quarries Rules are not applicable and what is the effect of non-renewal of 'Patta' Ex.1?

3. Whether the suit is not within limitation qua the appellant - State of Rajasthan and the Director of Mines and Geology Department, Rajasthan?

4. In the second appeal preferred by the appellants - Mangu and Ors., this Court vide order dated 13.06.1984 passed the interim order, which reads as under:

"Meanwhile, the operation of judgment dated November 30, 1981 of the District Judge, Merta under appeal is stayed on the condition that the appellants furnish a solvent security to the satisfaction of the District Judge, Merta for the payment of Rs.10,000/- per annum as compensation from December 15, 1981 until the decision of the appeal to respondents No.1, 2 and 3 in case the appeal is dismissed. The security shall be accepted by the District Judge after notice to respondents No.1, 2 and 3."

5. Brief facts of the case, which are required to be noticed, are that the plaintiffs - Abdul Ghani and Ors. filed a suit seeking permanent injunction on 15.04.1967 stating that they are residents of Makrana and were holding Mine No.50 situated at Jhoopawali Range, Makrana, as an ancestral property and claimed that bapi patta has been issued to them for the said Mine on 30.11.1904 and they were carrying out the mining activities. It was stated that the pattas have been issued in Samvat 1931 Chait Sudi Ekam, Samvat 1948 Chait Badi Nam and Samvat 1949 Baisakh Sudh Dasham. In 1961, all the three pattas were joint as one single patta, which has corresponding year as 30.11.1904. It was alleged that the State tried to forcefully dispossess them from the said Mine and accordingly, cause of action has arisen on 10.04.1967 and a prayer was made to restrain the State and other persons from interf