Satish Kumar Mittal, J.

1. This order shall dispose of Civil Revision No. 3905 of 2003 and S.A.O. No. 44 of 2003, which are arising from the same suit between the parties, though against two different orders.

2. The instant Civil Revision has been filed by Pargat Singh and others, against the order dated 22.3.2003 whereby the application tiled by the petitioner for amendment of the grounds of appeal and for impleading the legal representatives of Daroga Singh as co-appellants has been dismissed. The S.A.O. has been filed against the order dated 8.5.2003 passed by the Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib vide which the appeal preferred by the appellant Pargat Singh against the judgment and decree dated 26.11.1999 has been dismissed being abated.

3. The brief facts, which are relevant vis-a-vis the questions involved for consideration in the aforesaid two cases, are that the petitioner Pargat Singh along with his brother Daroga Singh filed the instant suit for declaration, possession and permanent injunction against their brother Nachhattar Singh with a prayer that the plaintiffs were the joint owners along with the defendant to the extent of 1/3rd share each in the sui