Sabina, J.

1. Vide this judgment, RSA Nos. 134 and 135 of 2003 would be disposed of as the civil suits, out of which the said appeals had arisen, were consolidated and were disposed of vide common judgment.

2. Plaintiffs Santokh Singh etc. filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in their peaceful cultivating possession. Defendants Darshan Singh etc. also filed a suit against them for declaration. Vide judgment and decree dated 19.1.1999 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.), Jalandhar, the suit filed by Santokh Singh etc. was decreed, whereas, the suit filed by Darshan Singh etc. was dismissed. In appeals, the findings of the trial Court were reversed by Additional District Judge, Jalandhar vide judgment and decree dated 24.10.2002 . The suit filed by Santokh Singh etc. was dismissed, whereas, suit filed by Darshan Singh etc. was decreed. Hence, the present appeals.

3. Brief facts of suit No. 203/96 filed by Santokh Singh etc., as noticed by the trial Court in para Nos. 2 and 3 of its judgment, are as under :-

"2. The land measuring 15K-12M as fully detailed in the head note of the plaint is owned jointly by the parties to the suit a