- (1.) Challenge in this appeal is the judgment and decree dated 13.6.2011 passed by Shri G.K.Dhir, learned District Judge, Ropar vide which the appeal preferred by the defendants/appellants against the judgment and decree dated 25.4.2008 passed by Ms.Mandeep Pannu, Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ropar was dismissed.
(2.) The case of the plaintiff in brief is that originally Gajjan Singh was the owner of the suit land and after his death, his property was inherited by the plaintiffs and defendant Nos.1 to 3. During the life time of Gajjan Singh, defendant Nos.1 to 3 obtained a collusive decree in their favour from Gajjan Singh. Father of plaintiff No.1 requested the defendants No.1 to 3 to admit his rights and to declare the said decree as null and void but they refused. Later on father of plaintiff No.1 filed a civil suit against the defendant Nos.1 to 3 and other cosharers and the same was decreed. The defendant Nos.1 to 3 filed appeal against the said judgment and decree but the appeal was also dismissed. Thereafter regular second appeal filed by defendant Nos.1 to 3 was also dismissed. Due to this litigation, father of plaintiff No.1 spent a huge amount of Rs.50,000/- which is liable to be recovered from defendant Nos.1 to 3 as they also cultivated the land which was subject matter of the collusive decree suffered by Gajjan Singh in favour of the defendant Nos 1 to 3. after the dismissal of the regular second appeal filed by defendant Nos 1 to 3, the plaintiff and his brother Dalbir Singh filed an execution application and symbolic possession was given to plaintiff No.1 along with his brother Dalbir Singh. Husband of plaintiff No.2 and father of plaintiff Nos.3 and 4 died on 5.11.1999 and the property left by him is to be inherited by the plaintiffs No.2 to 4. The plaintiffs have suffered monetary loss of Rs.3-4 lacs but they claimed only Rs.50,000/- from the defendant Nos.1 to 3 on account of earlier litigation and occupation/mesne profit of the land which was subject matter of the earlier suit.
(3.) On put to notice, defendant Nos.1 to 3 appeared and filed written statement wherein they have raised the preliminary objections that the plaintiffs have got no locus standi to file the present suit, the plaint is vague and is liable to be rejected.;