Obtaining possession after the passing of the decree in accordance therewith amounts to satisfaction of the decree for possession and if the decree-holder is dispossessed thereafter, he gets a fresh cause of action for filing a second suit on the basis of his dispossession.

1. This appeal came up for hearing in the first instance before my Lord the Chief Justice and was referred by him to a Division Bench for decision by order dated January 23, 1970. This is how this Appeal comes up for hearing before us.

2. The facts of the case have been given in detain in the order of reference but it is necessary to recapitulate them in order to decide the point of law involved. The facts are that the predecessors of the present plaintiff-appellants filed a suit on April 20, 1905, against Kaithal, defendant 4, and predecessors of the other defendants, who are all respondents to the appeal, for the possession of the entire land left by Smt. Jiwani, widow of Dilsukh, who held the estate before her death for her life as widows estate. The land measured 224 Bighas 5 Biswas. It was alleged by the plaintiffs of that suit that they were the sole heirs of Dilsukh and Smt. Jiwani and were entitled to inherit the entire land. It may be stated here that the common ancestor of the parties had three branches. The plaintiffs and their predecessors belonged to one branch while the defendants and their predecessors belonged to the second branch. Dilsukh belonged to the third branch and had died issueless. In the revenue records prepared in 1900-1901 Smt. Jiwani was described as being in possession of the said land as the widow of Dilsukh and the land held by her was an occupancy tenancy. She died in 1904 and the Jamabandi of the year 1904-1905, Exhibit P.3, shows that on her death the land was mutated as Shamlat Thula Pandu, in other words, as the common land of the rightholders of Thula Pandu in the village. This Thula Pandu solely consisted of the plaintiffs and the defendants of the suit of 1905. There was no other co-sharer in that Thula. The entry in the mutation, which was subsequently incorporated in the Jamabandi, was that the rightholders of Thula Pandu had shares in this common land according to their shares in the khewat (hasab rasad khewat.) this entry was channelled in the suit as the plaintiffs then claimed that they were the sole heirs of Dilsukh but at the trial of the suit they gave up their claim to one-half of the estate and only claimed the possession of one-half of that estate presumably on the basis that the plaintiffs and defendants were equally entitled to succeed to the land left by Dilsukh and his widow Smt. Jiwani. The learned subordinate Judge passed a decree in favour of the plaintiffs against the defendants in respect of the one-half of the estate of Dilsukh left by his widow Smt. Jiwani, on July 17, 1905. No appeal was taken against that a decree and thus it became final. It is also an admitted fact that this decree was never executed through the Court by the plaintiff-decree-holders but it is alleged that in 1909, the plaintiffs had taken possession of more land than fell to their share according to the said decree. Before filing the suit in 1905, the plaintiffs alleged that they were already in possession of 89 Bighas 18 Biswas and 7 Biswans is of land. The remaining 134 Bighas 12 Biswas 6 Biswans is of land was in possession of the defendants according to the entry in Jamabandi hasab rasad khewat. The present plaintiffs and their predecessors continued to remain in possession of land which was more than their share till July, 1954, when the proceedings for the consolidation of holdings in their village started. In repartition, the Consolidation Officer, in spite of the protest by the plaintiffs, allotted the lands to the plaintiffs and defendants in accordance with the entry in the Jamabandi husab rasad khewat and not in accordance with the decree which had been passed in 1905 and which, being inter parties, was binding on them. The total area of the holding divisible between the plaintiffs and defendants on consolidation came to be 286 Kanals 8 Marlas. Out of this area, 62 Kanals 8 Marlas were left joint for Thula Pandu and the remaining 244 Kanals were distributed amongst the plain