Rajendra Nath Mittal, J. - (1.) THIS second appeal has been filed by the Plaintiffs against the judgment and decree of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Bhiwani, dated 19th May, 1975.
(2.) IN order to appreciate the facts, the following pedigree table will be helpful : Briefly, the facts are that Ramji Lal, a Jat governed by customary law, sold the land in dispute to Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 for a consideration of Rs. 4,000, -vide sale -deed dated 29th December, 1953. On the date of sale, Rohtas Defendant No. 4 had born and Phul Singh Plaintiff No. 1 was in embryo, who was later born on 12th April, 1954. Hazari and Mohinder, Plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3, were born much after the sale. The Plaintiffs filed a usual declaratory suit challenging the sale on the grounds that the land was ancestral qua. them and that the sale was without consideration and legal necessity.
(3.) THE suit was contested by Defendants Nos. 1 to 3 who controverted the allegations of the Plaintiffs and inter alia pleaded that the land was non -ancestral and that the sale was for consideration and legal necessity. They further pleaded that the suit was not within limitation.;