Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri Pankaj Agarwal, Advocate holding brief on behalf of Sri M.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Arvind Srivastava, Advocate for respondents.

2. The following three issues have been raised by Sri Pankaj Agarwal, Advocate, on behalf of the appellants:

(I) The plaintiffs specifically pleaded adverse possession over both the properties, i.e., Chabutara and Khandahar but Lower Appellate Court in a wholly illegal manner has rejected the said plea.

(II) Original Suit No. 703 of 1975 was instituted by Gopal Dharamshala Trust wherein plaintiffs-appellants claimed that they are owner and in possession thereof. The said suit was dismissed. Hence it would operate as res judicata against all the defendants and that issue once operate as res judicata against them, the Courts below could not have looked into this aspect of the matter afresh but ought to have granted injunction holding plaintiffs-appellants, owner in respect of both the properties.

(III) That the disputed Chabutara was a part of plot No. 109, as held by Trial Court while deciding issue No. 1, but Lower Appellate Court held plaintiffs only in possession thereof and not as