Shiv Dayal, J.

The only question involved in this revision is whether the civil suit is competent. Respondent Bansilal instituted a suit under Section 326, Qanoon Mal on June 9, 1951 in the Court of the Tehsildar, Susneer, on the allegation that he was in possession of 36 survey numbers in village Paili as his khud-kasht land; that on June 1, 1951 the Defendants Bapulal, Kanhaiyalal and Ram Prasad unlawfully took possession of the lands and that he was, therefore, entitled to restoration of possession. The defence was that the Plaintiff's father had led them into possession and that their possession was not unlawful. That suit was dismissed by the Tehsildar on June 9, 1952. Stage by stage the Plaintiff went up to the Board of Revenue but remained unsuccessful everywhere.

Thereafter, the Plaintiff instituted the present suit against the very same Defendants. Bapulal Defendant No. 1 is his step-brother and Kanhaiyalal and Ram Prasad Defendants are sons of Bapulal. The Defendants raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the present suit. The trial Judge has held that the suit is competent. It is against this preliminary finding that the present revision has been