Arun Kumar Goel, J. — Before adverting to the respective contentions urged at the time of hearing of this appeal, facts on which parties are not at variance, need to be briefly noted.

2. Prem Raj and Baldev Verma appellant and respondent respectively, jointly owned land comprised in Khasra Nos. 911, 912, 913/1, 913/2, 913/ 3, 914/1, 914/2, 915/1, 915/2, 916/1, 912/3, 918/2, 919/2 plots 13 measuring 5486 sq. meters situate at village Basal Patti Kather, Pargana Sumna, Tehsil and District Solan. According to appellant, hereinafter referred to as the Defendant, this land is joint. Whereas according to respondent, hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff it stood partitioned and both the parties were in separate and exclusive possession of the land which had fallen to their respective shares.1

3. Record of the case further shows that vide Ext. PX/2 statement was made on 31.5.1984 by both the parties before the patwari which was recorded in the Rapat Rojnamcha Waquati. On the basis of this report, Mutation No. 151 dated 12.6.1984 was attested. Pursuant to this land measuring 2748 sq. meters comprised in Khasra Nos. 911 and 912/2 Kita 2 fell to the share of the defendant and the remaining land measuring 2738 sq. meters fell to the share of the plaintiff.

4. This mutation was challenged in an appeal by the defendant and vide order dated 28.2.1989 passed by SDM (Collector), Solan, it was set aside while allowing the appeal of the defendant. Consequently, the case was remanded to Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, Solan for fresh enquiry and decision after affording opportunity to the appellant (defendant) of being heard. At the time of hearing of this appeal, the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties were not in a position to state what happened thereafter. Certified copy of this order is Ext. PW-l/A on the record of this case.

5. Learned Counsel for the parties were further not at variance that the defendant filed suit No. 294/1 of 1989 in the court of Senior Sub Judge, Solan on 1.7.1989. A certified copy of the plaint in this suit is Ext. PX/ 4. Relief claimed in this suit was in the following terms:— "(a) That the land comprised in Khasra Nos. 919/2, 912, 915/1, 915/ 2, 916/1, 916/3, 918/2, 911, 913/1, 913/2, 913/3, 914/1, 914/2, plots 13 measuring 5486 sq. meters entered at Khata No. 343, Khatauni Nos. 906 min. 907-min and 908-min, situated at Village Basal, Patti Kather, Pargana Sumna, Tehsil and District Solan is the joint property of plaintiff and defendant No. 1 and the mutation No. 151 dated 12.6.1984 showing the partition of the same is illegal, void, inoperative and is not binding against the rights of plaintiff and the sale deed No. 80 registered in the office of Sub Registrar, Solan on 3.2.1988 in respect of land comprised in Khasra Nos. 1164/ 915/1 and 1166/916/1, measuring 108 sq. meters in favour of defendant No. 2 is void, illegal, inoperative and is not binding against the rights of the plaintiff. (b) Decree for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant No. l from transferring or otherwise alienating any portion of the land in dispute or contracting any bargain with any prospective purchaser in any manner and restraining defendants from changing the nature of or development the land mentioned above in any manner”

6. Plaintiff contested the claim of the defendants in this suit. Similarly, Smt. Nisha, defendant No. 2 (sale in whose favour was challenged) also contested the claim. Certified copy of the written statement in this case is Ext. PX/6.

7. In this suit following issues were framed as contained in Ext. PX/ 7, are as under:

1. Whether the plaintiff is estopped by his act, conduct and acquiescence from filing the suit as alleged? OPD

2. Whether the suit in the present form is not maintainable? OPD

3. Whether the mutation No. 151 attested on 12.6.1983 qua the partition of suit land is void, inoperative and not binding as alleged? OPD

4. If Issue No. 3 is proved in affirmative, whether the suit