JUDGMENT

Arun Monga, J. (Oral)

For convenience, parties herein are described as per recitals before learned trial Court.

2. Having suffered concurrent adverse findings by the two Courts below, defendant (appellant herein) is in second appeal before this Court assailing learned trial Court judgment and decree dated 17.01.2013, as upheld by learned First Appellate Court vide its judgment and decree dated 17.09.2014.

3. Briefly stated, facts as noticed by Courts below are as under:-

The case of the plaintiffs is that the predecessor in interest of plaintiffs have been coming in cultivating possession of the suit land bearing Khewat Khatoni No.185/310, Khasra No.18 (0-16) situated within the revenue estate of village Nathupur Tehsil and District Gurgaon. It is submitted that predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs have been coming in actual physical cultivating possession of agricultural land detailed and described in Para No.3 and 4 of the plaint. It is submitted that plaintiffs and their predecessor in interest continue to be in possession of the above land under Shamlat deh when Punjab Occupancy Tenant (Vesting of Proprietary) Act 1952 came into force. It is submitted that plaintiffs and their predecessor in interest have become owners of the suit land much before coming into force of Punjab Village Common Land Act No.18 of 1961 which was enforced on 4.5.19661 and the Gram Panchayat Act of 1953 which come into force on 26.3.1953 and Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1997 was enforced in November 1994. It is submitted that during the compilation of jamabandi for the year 1956-57 the revenue officials wrongly and negligently without any basis had entered in the name of Civil Panchayat deh in the column of ownership which entry is meaningless. It is submitted that while compilation of jamabandi for the year 1961-62 the name of Mithu i.e. father of plaintiff No.1 has been left out wrongly due to negligence of revenue official. It is submitted that when the alleged mistake come to the knowledge of Teku plaintiff No.1 then, he had filed a Suit for declaration seeking correction in the revenue record in case No.1086 of 1990 titled as Teku v. Ramesh etc. decided on 13.11.1990. It is submitted that name of Ishwar has been deleted in the jamabandi for the year 1980- 81 and in the jamabandi for the year 1990-91 and the correction is liable to be made in favour of plaintiffs No.15 to 18. It is submitted that plaintiffs have requested the defendant to admit the claim of the plaintiffs but the defendant has refused to do so. Hence, the suit.

4. Upon notice, defendant appeared and filed the written statement taking preliminary objections regarding jurisdiction and locus standi etc. On merits, it was submitted that plaintiffs are not in cultivating possession of the land in dispute since the time of their predecessors and they are unauthorizedly in possession of the suit land. It is pleaded that the entries in the jamabandi are legal and correct and are not liable to be corrected. All other averments were also denied.

5. Based on the rival pleadings, following issues were framed:

1. "Whether plaintiffs have became occupancy tenants of the suit property, as alleged? OPP

2. Whether Civil Court has no jurisdiction to try and decide the present suit? OPD

3. Whether plaintiffs have no locus standi? OPD

4. Relief."

6. The parties to the suit adduced their oral as well as documentary evidence in support of their pleadings and to discharge their respective onus as per the issues, ibid.

7. On appraisal of evidence vis-a-vis pleadings, issue Nos.1 and 2 wer