NIRMAL YADAV, J. - (1.) THIS is plaintiffs' appeal against the judgment and decree dated 17.7.1993 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ropar, vide which the judgment and decree dated 7.12.1989 passed in favour of the plaintiff-appellants was reversed and their suit had been dismissed.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that Shobha Ram, predecessor-in- interest of the plaintiff-appellants had purchased a plot along with adjoining property vide sale-deed dated 11.11.1895 from Smt. Ralli widow of Nathu Ghumiar and since then, the plaintiffs' predecessor-in-interest and thereafter the plaintiffs are in possession of the property in question. It is further pleaded that the defendant/respondents in connivance with the local police initiated proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. with regard to a part of property on 10.3.1983. On 9.3.1984, S.D.M. Ropar, without recording any evidence, declared the defendants' predecessors-in-interest Rakha Ram and Basant Kaur to be in possession of a part of the property. In pursuance of the said order, Rakha Ram and his wife entered into forcible possession of the property in dispute with the intervention of the local police. After their death, defendants are in possession of the suit property. Suit was contested by the defendant-respondents mainly on the ground that the boundaries of the suit property mentioned in the plaint do not tally with the boundaries as existing at the spot. It is further pleaded that the defendants are the owners in possession of the property and the plaintiffs neither purchased the suit property from Smt. Ralli as stated by them nor plaintiffs or their predecessor-in-interest have ever been in possession of the suit property. According to the defendants, S.D.M. Ropar found the defendants in possession of the property in the proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C.
(3.) THE trial Court after taking into consideration the pleadings of the parties, framed the following issues :- 1. Whether the plaintiffs are owners of the property in suit as alleged in the plaint ? OPP 2. Whether defendants are in illegal possession of the property in suit ? OPP 3. Whether plaintiffs are estopped from filing the suit ? OPD 4. Whether suit is properly valued for the purpose of Court fee ? OPP 5. Relief. ;