Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. - (1.) THE matrix of the facts, which requires to be noticed for the limited purpose of deciding the sole controversy, involved in the instant regular second appeal and emanating from the record, is that Salwinder Pal and Sukhdev Raj sons of Munshi Ram respondent Nos. 1 & 2 -plaintiffs (for brevity "the plaintiffs") filed the suit against their mother Smt.Giano -appellant defendant No. 1, brothers Janak Raj and Balwant Rai and sister Chhindo respondent Nos. 3 to 5 -defendant Nos. 2 to 4, seeking a decree for separate possession, by way of partition, by metes and bounds of the property in dispute, inter -alia pleading that Munshi Ram son of Labhu Ram was original owner and in possession of the joint property in dispute. He died on 20.3.1991, leaving behind the plaintiffs and defendants as his legal representatives. In this manner, the parties have already inherited his estate in equal shares. However, it was alleged that defendant No. 4 Chhindo has no share in it. According to the plaintiffs, as there remains a dispute between the co -sharers and they are not able to reap the fruits of their shares, therefore, they sought a decree for separate possession, by virtue of partition of the joint property in dispute. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, the plaintiffs filed the suit against the defendants, in the manner described hereinbefore.
(2.) THE defendants contested the suit and filed the written statement, inter -alia pleading certain preliminary objections of, maintainability of the suit, estoppel, cause of action and locus standi of the plaintiffs. It was, however, admitted that Munshi Ram was the owner and in possession of the joint property and the parties are his legal heirs. The case set up by the defendants, in brief in so far as relevant, was that the plaintiffs have no right in the suit property. The matter was stated to have been amicably settled on 6.4.2000 and a mutual partition has already been taken place. It was claimed that since the property in dispute has already been partitioned, so, the plaintiffs have no right, title or interest in it. It will not be out of place to mention here that the defendants have stoutly denied all other allegations contained in the plaint and prayed for dismissal of the suit.
(3.) CONTROVERTING the allegations of the written statement and reiterating the pleadings contained in the plaint, the plaintiffs filed the replication. In the wake of pleadings of the parties, the trial Court framed the essential issues for proper adjudication of the case.;