(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiffs and arises out of a suit for joint possession of two plots Nos. 4456 and 4769 in a certain village in Azamgarh. Admittedly, the patties are co-sharers. The case which was pat forward by the plaintiffs was that, being joint owners, they were entitled to joint possession of the two plots in question, that what was actually happening was that the defendants had taken exclusive possession of the plots and were not allowing them to interfere with their possession of it. They claimed that, because of this action of the defendants they were entitled to bring a suit for joint possession.
(2.) The suit was resisted by the defendants on the ground that the plot in dispute was a tal or a low lying land which they claimed they had filled up and made cultivable. In so doing they had spent money and labour and the defence taken by them was that the remedy of the plaintiffs who undoubtedly were joint owners of these plots with them was to bring a suit for a partition or profits in the revenue Court. Another defence which was taken by them was that the tal was filled up by them some six years back and the plaintiffs had consented by their conduct to their doing so.
(3.) The trial Court did not accept the case set up by the defendants. It thought that the plaintiffs had been able to establish their case and decreed their suit for possession.