Darshan Singh, J.

The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 21.11.2015 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Gurgaon, whereby the appeal filed by appellants-defendants against the judgment and decree dated 11.08.2014 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Gurgaon, has been dismissed.

2. Plaintiffs-respondents no.1 to 5 filed the suit for mandatory injunction directing the appellants-defendants to remove the encroachment made by them by raising construction of walls in the red portion which forms part of Khasra no. 2269 situated in village Gurgaon at their own costs. Plaintiffs-respondents also sought a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in any manner and encroach upon or raising any kind of construction in the suit property shown with letters 'ABC' in the site plan attached with the plaint.

3. The suit was filed by the plaintiffs who belongs to Nai (Barber) Community in representative capacity for themselves and on behalf of Nai Samaj of village Gurgaon. That the Barber Community was not having any place for organising their functions in village Gurgaon. They requested Gram Panchayat in the year 2003 to allot some area for the construction of the Chobara/Community hall for the Barber Community. The Gram Panchayat allotted an area measuring 500 sq. yards out of Khasra No. 2269 in village Gurgaon. Resolution dated 26.01.2003 was passed in this regard. However, possession of only the area measuring 180 sq. yards could be delivered to the plaintiffs as rest of the area was found to have been encroached upon by the appellants-defendants. Plaintiffs raised construction of rooms in the said land shown in green colour in the site plan. Defendants forcibly raised some construction shown in red colour in the site plan and they are adamant to raise further construction in order to encroach upon the land of the plaintiffs. Hence the suit.

4. Defendants contested the suit on the grounds inter alia that the suit land is not the part and parcel of Khasra No. 2269 as claimed in the plaint. In fact, the land in suit is comprised of Khasra Nos. 10184/2270/2(1-2-2) and No. 1085/2270/3 (0-1-1) situated within the revenue estate of village Gurgaon. It was further pleaded that earlier the suit land was owned by one Kalu Ram, the maternal grandfather of the appellants from whom it was purchased by Suraj Bhan, the father of defendants who entered into the possession of the suit land as owner and raised the construction of the Pucca house in the year 1985. The electricity connection exists in the said house since the year 1987 in the name of appellant Rajinder Singh. The wall was constructed and completed in the year 2007 much before the filing of the suit, appellants denied that Gram Pandchayat had allotted any area measuring 500 sq. yards out of Khasra No. 2269 situated in village Gurgaon to the plaintiffs or Nai Community. They also denied that if any such resolution has been passed by the Gram Panchayat and the alleged delivery of the suit land to the plaintiffs. With these pleas, they pleaded for dismissal of the suit.

5. Plaintiffs filed the replication wherein the pleas raised in the written statement were controverted and those of the plaint were reaffirmed. From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the learned trial Court :-

1. Whether the plaintiffs and Nai Community of village Gurgaon was allotted 500 sq. yds. Land out of Khasra No. 2269 by Gram Panchayat? OPPs

2. Whether the defendants have encroached upon the land of Khasra No. 2269? OPP

3. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the decree for mandatory injunction as prayed for? OPP

4. Whether the suit land is part and parcel of Khasra No. 1083/270 & 1086/270/1 owned by the defendants? OPD

5. Whether the plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present suit? OPD

6. Whether the plaintiff is stopped by his own act and conduct, latches and acquiescence in the present s