SURINDER SARUP, J.—This appeal is directed against the concurrent judgments and decrees of both the courts below dismissing the suit of the plaintiffs-appellants. The suit had been filed for declaration and permanent injunction on the pleadings that the plaintiffs are owners in possession of the suit land, fully described in the plaint. According to them, the defendants-respondents have been interfering in their possession without any right, hence the suit for declaration to the effect that they are owners in possession and consequently relief for issuance of permanent injunction restraining the defendants-respondents from interfering in their possession over the suit land in any way.

2. In the written statement, defendants-respondents denied the claim of the plaintiffs-appellants and according to them, defendant No. 1 had been in possession of the suit land as tenant on payment of BATAI and had become its owner by coming into force of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act. Certain preliminary objections were also taken. On the pleadings of the parties, trial Court framed the following issues : -

1. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled for the relief of permanent