ORDER :

RAHUL BHARTI, J.

1. Heard the learned counsel for both sides.

2. The four appellants herein came to be named as the defendants in a civil suit filed by the four respondents herein.

3. The suit so filed by the respondents is asking for a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction read with a mandatory injunction thereby seeking restraining of the appellants from causing any interference or raising any construction upon two marlas of Shamlat Deh land (Taraf Rehn) born out of khasra No. 1162 situated in village Rehmbal (Morha Rehni) said to be located adjoining eastern side of the respondents’ proprietary land comprising khasra No. 1183 and also for mandatory injunction requiring the appellants herein to demolish the construction made upon the said two marlas of suit land comprised in khasra No. 1162.

4. The suit came to be instituted on 08.01.2015.

5. Before filing of the said suit, the parties (appellants and respondents) had already previously suffered a long drawn round of litigation vis-à-vis each other with the respondents being the initiators of said previous litigation.

6. The appellants, as defendants No. 1 to 4 in the suit, came forward with a joint written statement meeting and objecting the averments made in the plaint both on factual side as well as on legal side, and also raising preliminary objection with respect to the maintainability of the suit.

7. In the context of preliminary objection, the appellants referred to section 118(E) of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Revenue Act, Svt., 1996 concerning partition of shamlat deh land pleading that the appellants are in possession of only 11 marlas out of said shamlat khasra No. 1162 and as such their possession qua said 11 marlas of land is protected by the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Revenue Act, Svt., 1996.

8. In this regard, the appellants also made a reference in their written statement about an adjudication of a civil revision (CR) No. 32/2014 done by this Court which civil revision was filed by the appellants challenging an order dated 03.09.2014 passed by the court of learned Munsiff, Udhampur in the earlier round of litigation initiated by the respondents.

9. This earlier round of litigation was referring to the alleged acts of interference on the part of the appellants with respect to khasra No. 1183 owned by the respondents whereas in the Commissioner’s report submitted by the Revenue Officials therein it had come to fore that the proprietary khasra No. 1183 of the respondents was not in any way being wronged by the appellants whereas the state of things have happened qua khasra No. 1162 which is admittedly a shamlat khasra number.

10. The appellant No. 1 is also similarly placed as that of the respondents as being the original land holder of village Rehmbal and purportedly having his share/stake in the shamlat deh land.

11. The appellant No. 1 executed a sale deed in favour of the appellant No. 2 for two marlas of land out of his proprietary khasra No. 1576 but instead the appellant No. 2, under the cover of sale deed, came to station herself in terms of her possession qua khasra No. 1162 that being shamlat deh land.

12. It is in this backdrop of facts and circumstances that the respondents came forward with the institution of the suit in reference.

13. In the written statement, the appellants did not expressly invoke Order VII Rule 11 (1) (d) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Procedure Code, Svt. 1977.

14. Given the tone and tenor of the preliminary objections No. 1 and 2 raised in the written statement in response to the plaint, Order VII Rule 11 (d) of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Procedure Code, Svt. 1977 was not forthcoming.

15. The trial court of Munsiff (District Judicial Mobile Magistrate) Udhampur came to respond to the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Procedure Code, Svt. 1977 by the appellants on 21.05.2015 after submission of written statement on 13.02.2015 in which application the appellants came forward with