R.L. Anand, J. (Oral) - This revision petition has been directed against the order dated 13th September, 1999 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurgaon, but dismissed the application of the petitioners under Order 14, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code for framing of the additional issue.

2. The plaintiff-petitioners filed a suit for declaration with a consequential relief of permanent injunction and in the alternative consequential relief for joint possession, in respect of the land detailed in the head-note of the plaint alleging that there are three sets of defendants represented by their different lawyers and these defendants have filed three written statements. Whereas the stand of defendant Nos. 13 and 14 in their written statement is that they have become owners of the land in question by way of adverse possession, while the stand of defendant Nos. 2 to 12 is that they are occupying the land on account of the fact that they are the occupancy tenants. This part of the defence of the defendants has been specifically denied by the plaintiffs in their replication. In this view of the matter, when the defendants have taken a specific plea with regard to adverse