JUDGMENT

Namit Kumar, J.

This regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 15.07.2017 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, whereby suit for declaration and permanent injunction filed by plaintiff-respondents No.1 to 5 has been decreed as well as against the judgment and decree dated 11.04.2019 passed by District Judge, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, whereby appeal filed by the respondent-appellant against the judgment and decree dated 15.07.2017, has been dismissed.

2. For convenience sake, reference to parties is being made as per their status in the civil suit. The facts relevant for disposal of this regular second appeal are that plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration to the effect that plaintiffs No.1 and 2 are joint owners in possession in equal shares to the extent of half share whereas plaintiffs No.3 to 5 are owners in possession in equal shares to the extent of half share in land measuring 04 Kanals 09 Marlas comprised in Khasra No.25//14/2, situated at village Nabh, HB No.389, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar and the entries of the said land in the name of defendant are wrong and are liable to be corrected in the name of the plaintiffs showing them as owners in possession of the same and with consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering in plaintiffs' possession over the suit land in any manner whatsoever. They have also sought the relief of possession in case the court comes to the conclusion that the plaintiffs are not in possession of the suit land. It was pleaded that Central Government was recorded as owner of the suit land as per jamabandi for the year 1986-87. The suit land was put to auction by Rehabilitation Department under the disposal of Surplus Rural Evacue Property Scheme. Chander Shekhar son of Bal Kishan purchased the suit land in open auction and sale deed No.5403 dated 27.01.1993 was executed by Rehabilitation Department in favour of Chander Shekhar and mutation No.422 was sanctioned in his favour. Vide sale deed dated 929 dated 17.05.1993, Chander Shekhar further sold the suit land to the plaintiffs for a sale consideration of Rs. 24,000/- and mutation No.425 was sanctioned in their favour. Since then, the plaintiffs are owners in possession of their respective shares in the suit land. On 19.02.2007, mutation No.550 was sanctioned in favour of Gram Panchayat, Nabh, by the revenue authorities. The suit land was also included in the mutation whereas the same was not involved in the litigation on the basis of which mutation was sanctioned. No notice was given by the revenue authorities to the plaintiffs regarding the said mutation. Vide notification dated 18.03.2010, area of village Nabh was included in the limits of Municipal Corporation, Yamuna Nagar/Jagadhri. Mutation No.667 was sanctioned in favour of Municipal Corporation, Yamuna Nagar, but the suit land neither belonged to Gram Panchayat, Nabh at any point of time nor it vested in Municipal Corporation, Yamuna Nagar. When mutation No.667 was sanctioned, no notice was served upon the plaintiffs. The defendants have now started asserting their rights of ownership over the suit land on the basis of mutation No.667. Legal notice under Section 389 of Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 was issued to the defendant, but no effort was made to correct this entry. Defendant No.2 sanctioned mutation No.550 dated 19.02.2007 without any basis as the plaintiffs were neither party to proceedings dated 12.10.2004 and mutation No.667 sanctioned on 18.06.2011 in favour of defendant No.1 are null and void as