Mr. Amit Rawal, J. The present Regular Second Appeal is directed at the instance of the appellant-plaintiffs against the concurrent findings of fact and law, whereby their suit for declaration claiming ownership being occupancy tenants, has been dismissed.

2. Appellant-plaintiffs instituted the suit on the premise that one Chandra son of Gora was in cultivation possession of the suit land described in Para 1 of the plaint prior to 1938-39. After his death, he was succeeded by Smt.Suhagi and Illiyas in equal shares. Suhagi died issueless and she was succeeded by father of the plaintiffs Illiyas and mutation No.3418 in this regard was sanctioned. Father of the plaintiffs Illiyas also expired and succeeded by the plaintiffs and mutation No.3716 was also sanctioned. Since then, they are in long and continuous possession.

3. Revenue record placed on record, i.e., Ex.P1 to Ex.P26, Ex.PX and Ex.PJ commencing from 1938-39 till 2001-02, proved the long and settled possession of the plaintiffs. Over and above the documentary evidence, plaintiffs examined four witnesses, namely, PW-1 Mohd.Farukh, PW-2 Gariba, PW-3 Mohammad Deen and PW-4 Yusuf Lambardar.

4. Mr. Mukul Aggarwal, learned