- (1.) Plaintiffs Risala and others instituted a suit for possession in a representative capacity against Municipal Committee, Narwana by pleading that 4/5 th share of the suit land measuring 60 kanals 9 marlas situated at Narwana was titled, owned and possessed by the proprietors of Thola Panchayam consisting of one share each of Patti Ramu, Khandu, Miru, Radar and Dass. It was pleaded that the defendants had no right or interest in the suit land but in pursuance to the provisions of the Punjab Municipal Common Lands Act, 1974 (herein after referred to as the 1974 Act), mutation no. 6097 had been sanctioned on 15.7.1976 in favour of the defendants without notice to the plaintiffs. It was further pleaded that the aforementioned 1974 Act had been declared ultra vires and had been struck down by the High Court and consequently the plaintiffs' status as owners in possession in suit was restored. It was pleaded that the defendant had been called upon to get the mutation cancelled but on their refusal and upon the defendant-Committee taking forcible possession of the suit land, the suit had been filed.
(2.) The defendant contested the suit in terms of stating that Municipal Committee, Narwana was continuing as owner in possession of the suit land even prior to the enactment of the 1974 Act by virtue of the provisions of the PEPSU Common Lands (Regulations) Act, 1954 (herein after referred to as the 1954 Act). It was further stated that the mutation regarding the suit land had been sanctioned on 11.5.1977 in favour of Municipal Committee, Narwana in pursuance to the provisions of the 1974 Act.
(3.) Upon the pleadings of the parties, following issues were struck by the Trial Court:- "(1) Whether the plaintiffs are owners of the suit property as alleged?OPP. (2) Whether the mutation No. 6097 sanctioned on 15.7.76 in favour of the defendant is illegal, void and not binding on the rights of the plaintiffs?OPP. (3) Whether the plaintiffs have no locus-standi to file the present suit?OPP. (4) Whether the suit is barred by limitation?OPD. (5) Whether the suit is barred by principle of res judicata?OPD. (6) Relief. ";