T. R. Handa, J.—This petition in revision filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure raises a simple but interesting question of law.

2. The facts giving rise to this petition do not appear to be in dispute and may be briefly sketched like this: S/Shri Raghunandan Purshotam Chand, Prakash Chand and Dewan Chand, respondents Nos. 1 to 4, were joint owners in equal shares of a piece of land measuring 3 kanals and 15 marlas comprised in Khasra No. 472 as per Jamabandi for the year 1962-63 of Tika and Mauza Moodla Khas, Tebsil Kangra. In the year 1968 these respondents filed a civil suit against the present petitioners for possession of a small area measuring 3 sarshais only forming part of the aforesaid Khasra No. 472 on the allegation that the petitioners had illegally encroached upon this much portion of Khasra No. 472. A consent decree for possession in respect of the area of 3 sarshais forming part of Khasra No. 472 as claimed in the suit, was passed in favour of the respondents on 7-12-1968, though the contention of the petitioners was that they had not encroached upon any part of Khasra No. 472.

3. Later, the respondents took out execution of the decree and pra