- (1.) This regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P. dated 6.10.2003, passed in Civil Appeal No. 54-G/XIII-02.
(2.) "Key facts" necessary for the adjudication of this regular second appeal are that the respondents-plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs), have instituted suit for declaration qua ownership and in the alternative for possession against the appellants-defendants (hereinafter referred to as the defendants). The subject matter of the suit is land comprised in Khata No. 21, Khatauni No. 35, Kh. No. 148 to 151, measuring 0-42-99 hectares and Khata No. 22, Khatauni No. 36, Kh. No. 202, 203, 206, 206/1, 208 and 213, measuring 0-51-89 hectares, situated in Mohal Jakhot, Mauza Bharoli, Tehsil Dehra, Distt. Kangra, H.P., as per jamabandi for the year 1990-91 (hereinafter referred to as the suit land). The suit land was initially owned and possessed by one Sh. Dallu son of Shibu who had two sons namely, Kihru and Jalsi. The plaintiffs are successors-in-interest of Jalsi and defendant No. 1 Mulkh Raj, is successor-in-interest of Kihru. The plaintiffs consequently filed a suit against the defendants. It was decided by the learned District Judge, Kangra on 29.8.1969. The plaintiffs were in possession of the suit land prior to the death of Dallu and after the decision of the Court in the year 1969, they continued in possession of this land asserting their right of ownership openly, peacefully, continuously and as such they claimed adverse possession. During the year 1971, Sh. Kihru, predecessor-in-interest of defendant No. 1 Mulkh Raj filed civil suit for possession of suit land against the plaintiffs. It was dismissed by the Senior Sub Judge, Kangra on 27.10.1980. However, after dismissal of suit, possession of the suit land remained with the plaintiffs. The predecessor-ininterest of the defendant No. 1 Mulkh Raj attempted to take possession of the suit land from the plaintiffs but was not allowed to take possession and they have right of ownership for the last 25 years and as such they have become owner of the suit land by way of adverse possession.
(3.) The suit was contested by the defendants. The defendants controverted the claim of the plaintiffs that they were coming in possession of the suit land prior to the death of Dallu and have become owners of the suit land by way of adverse possession. According to them, Dallu had executed Will dated 26.9.1962 in favour of Khiru, predecessor-interest of defendant No. 1 on the basis of which he succeeded to the estate of Dallu in the year 1963. Thereafter, Jalsi predecessor-in-interest of plaintiffs filed suit for possession of 1/2 share of the land of Dallu on the ground that the Will was not valid. It was decided by the learned Senior Sub Judge, Kangra. It was challenged in appeal by Khiru before the learned District Judge, Kangra and the learned District Judge, Kangra vide judgment dated 29.8.1969 modified the decree whereby the land granted to the plaintiffs was reduced from 14 kanals 4 marlas to 14 kanals. It was denied that mutation No. 66 was obtained by defendants in connivance with the revenue officials. According to them, it was at the instance of the plaintiffs that this mutation was got sanctioned in accordance with the decision in appeal dated 29.8.1969.;