Rajiv Sharma, J.

This Regular Second Appeal has been instituted against judgment and decree dated 29.10.2004 rendered by the learned Additional District Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh in Civil Appeal No. 27 of 2000.

2. “Key facts” necessary for the adjudication of the present appeal are that the predecessor-in-interest of the present appellants namely Shri Krishan Singh, filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief of injunction against predecessor-in-interest of the present respondents (defendant No. 1, Dayal Singh) (hereinafter referred to as 'defendant No. 1' for convenience sake). According to the averments made in the plaint, suit land was under joint tenancy of the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 under proforma defendant No. 2 namely Purshotam. Plaintiff and defendant No. 1 were cultivating the suit land as non-occupancy tenants since long and they were having this status as on 3.10.1975 and as such under the provisions of Section 104(3) of the HP Tenancy & Land Reforms Act, 1972, and Rule 27 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy & Land Reforms Rules, 1975, the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 became cosharers in joint possession over the suit land. How