1. The plaintiffs have approached this Court through the present regular second appeal. The challenge is to the judgment and decree passed by the learned Courts below whereby the suit for declaration filed by them has been dismissed.

2. The plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration claiming that they are owners in possession of land measuring 8 bighas 8 biswas 6 biswansis. The details of the land have been given in the plaint. They claimed that defendants Nos.1 and 2 Bhajan Singh and Kirat Singh should not dispossess them in execution of decree dated April 6,1959 passed against defendant No.3, Lal Singh.

3. The plaintiffs claimed that Bishan Singh, their father, had purchased the land in dispute from the original owners through various sale deeds and came into possession of the same as owners on the basis of the aforesaid sale deeds. Earlier, the present defendants Nos. 1 and 2, namely, Bhajan Singh and Kirat Singh filed a suit on March 6, 1958 for possession of land measuring 2 bighas 14 biswas 3 biswansis against Lal Singh, who was arrayed as defendant No.1. Bishan Singh father of the plaintiffs was arrayed as defendant No.2 in the said suit. The said defendants filed the aforesaid earlier suit claiming that they were the owners of the aforesaid land on the basis of a sale deed dated May 3, 1951. Lal Singh, the present defendant No.3 (defendant No.1 in the earlier suit) chose not to appear and was proceeded against ex parte in that suit. However, a written statement was filed by Bishan Singh, father of the plaintiffs. He claimed that he had purchased the land from the original owner Lal Singh and, as such, could not be dispossessed from the land sold to him. Subsequently, the plaintiffs in the aforesaid suit namely, Bhajan Singh and Kirat Singh, made a statement withdrawing their claim against aforesaid defendant, Bishan Singh. On the aforesaid statement of the said plaintiffs, name of Bishan Singh was struck off from the array of defendants. On abandonment of the claim of the said plaintiffs against Bishan Singh, the suit against him was consequently dismissed. Proceedings continued against remaining defendant No.1 Lal Singh. An ex parte decree was passed against Lal Singh on April 6, 1959.

4. The said decree dated April 6, 1959 was sought to be executed by the said decree holders Bhajan Singh and Kirat Singh (present defendants Nos.1 and 2). Bishan Singh claimed that the execution of the aforesaid decree was sought against the land owned by him as well. Accordingly he filed an objection petition before the executing Court. The said objection petition was dismissed in default by the executing Court on October 20, 1962. Subsequently, another objection petition was filed by sons of Bishan Singh on November 10, 1962 (since Bishan Singh had died in the meantime). The maintainability of the aforesaid objection petition was questioned by the decree-holders, Bhajan Singh and Kirat Singh, on the ground that earlier objection petition filed by Bishan Singh having been dismissed in default, the second objection petition was not maintainable. The decree holders also claimed that the decree was validly being executed with regard to the land described in the decree sheet. Vide order dated February 24, 1965, the executing Court held that the second objection petition filed by sons of Bishan Singh (the present plaintiffs) was not maintainable. Additionally, the executing Court also held that the decree was sought to be executed with regard to Khasra Numbers as mentioned in the decree. Accordingly, the objection petition filed by the objectors (the present plaintiffs) was dismissed. A copy of the said order dated February 24, 1965 is available on the record of the case as Ex. D3.

5. The objectors took up the matter in appeal. The appellate Court upheld the objection of the decree holders with regard to the maintainability of the objection petition. Accordingly, the appellate Court also held that the objections filed by sons of Bishan