Mr. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.

CM No.7789-C of 2010

For the reasons mentioned, the application is allowed. Delay, if any, in making up the deficiency in Court fee, is condoned.

RSA No.2598 of 2010(O&M)

This is defendants’ second appeal challenging the judgment and decrees of the Courts below whereby the suit of the plaintiffrespondent for possession was decreed further restraining the defendants from raising any construction over the same and with a further direction to hand over the vacant possession.

2. As per the averments, Sh. Chhotu, father of the plaintiffs, was owner in possession of the suit property which was allotted to him during consolidation. He died on 12.5.2002 and the plaintiffs along with their sisters became owners in possession of the suit property. However, the defendants have forcibly occupied the same and raised construction without any authority. Despite the plaintiffs’ request to hand over the possession, they refused to do so. . Hence the present suit for possession.

3. Upon notice, the defendants put in appearance. Defendant No.1 filed written statement and submitted that the suit was not maintainable. It was further stated that the plaintiffs were neither