Mahesh Grover, J.:- This Regular Second Appeal is directed against judgments and decrees dated 15.6.2002 and 30.3.2005 passed respectively by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’) and the Additional District Judge, Karnal (described hereinafter as ‘the First Appellate Court’) whereby the suit of plaintiff- Wazir Singh (since deceased and represented now by his legal representatives) was decreed and the appeal of the defendants-appellants was dismissed.

2. Wazir Singh initially filed suit against the appellants for permanent injunction. Subsequently, the plaint was permitted to be amended on an application filed by him as it was alleged that the possession of the suit land had forcibly been taken by the appellants. Accordingly, a prayer for passing a decree for possession of the suit land was made. It was pleaded that he was in possession of the land measuring 157 kanals 7 marlas as lessee on the basis of lease deed dated 18.7.1983. It was further pleaded that Bhagwan Singh son of Gurdit Singh was the owner of the suit land at that time and he had executed the registered lease deed in favour of Wazir Singh for a period of twenty years, i.e., from Kharif,1983 to Rabi,2003, at the rate of Rs.4000/- per annum and since then, he was in possession thereof. The suit land was stated to have been sold to the appellants on 19.7.1983 through a registered sale deed, but therein it was categorically mentioned that they would take possession thereof after the expiry of the period of lease in favour of Wazir Singh. Since then, it was averred that the payment of lease money was being made to the appellants and they were accepting the same without any objection and no receipt was obtained. It was pleaded that on account of some dispute during the election of the Gram Panchayat, the relations between Wazir Singh and the appellants became strained and, therefore, they started making attempts to take possession of the suit land from him. It was alleged that after filing of the suit, Wazir Singh was called by the police in the presence of father of appellant nos. 5 & 6 and was asked to surrender the possession of the suit land and even he along with his two brothers was detained in policy custody on 21.4.1995 and thereafter, they were challaned under Sections 107/151 of the Cr.P.C. It was further alleged that on 22.4.1995, at about 10.00 A.M., the appellants along with 40-50 persons armed with lethal weapons and with the police of Police Station, Nissing, came at the site and took forcible possession of the suit land.

3. Upon notice, the appellants put in appearance and filed their written statement, contesting the suit. However, no written statement was filed to the amended plaint. It was alleged by the appellants that there was no lease deed in favour of Wazir Singh and he was never in possession of the suit land and that they were in possession thereof from the date of sale deed in their favour. The other averments of Wazir Singh were also denied.

4. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:-

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for relief of possession of the suit property as prayed for?OPP

2. Whether the plaintiff has got no locus standi?OPD

3. Whether the suit is not maintainable, as alleged?OPD

4. Whether the suit is bad for mis-joinder of parties and nonjoinder of necessary parties?OPD

5. Whether the suit is improperly valued for the purposes of court fee and jurisdiction?OPD

6. Relief.

5. After appraisal of the evidence before it, the trial Court, as also the First Appellate Court concluded that the possession of the suit land had been forcibly taken from Wazir Singh on 22.4.1995 during the pendency of the suit which was filed for permanent injunction. Accordingly, the suit was decreed and the appellants were required to hand over the possession of the suit land to Wazir Singh.

6. This has resulted in the Regular Second Appeal by the appellants.