(1.) In this Regular Second Appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1976 (shortly hereinafter referred to as the Code) against the judgment and decree dated 27 -5 -1985 of the learned District Judge, Una, no substantial question of law has been framed at the time of admission of this appeal, vide the order dated June 27, 1985. Thus, after hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and after having satisfied myself that various substantial questions of law, the discussion of which would be made in subsequent paras, arise for the determination of this Court.
(2.) Smt. Pali was the owner of the suit land. She filed the instant suit for declaration simplicitor on .September 27, 1978. The relief sought for is that she is the owner in possession of the suit land and as a consequential relief, she has prayed for issuance of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering into her possession of the suit land. In the alternative, a prayer for possession has also been made.
(3.) The basis for seeking the reliefs aforesaid detailed in the plaint, are that she being an old lady unable to more, used to get the suit land cultivated through Shri Jiwan, defendant No. 4 (PW 3), her son -in -law and is continuing to be in cultivable possession of the suit land as owner. She asserted that defendants 1 to 3, asserting themselves to be tenants -at -will, got a decree for possession behind her back in their favour and against defendant No. 4 in Civil Suit No. 192/1976, decided on 18 -5 -1977 by the Senior Sub -Judge, Una which decree was confirmed by the then District Judge, Una vide his judgment and decree dated March 22, 1979. This decree despite being invalid, ineffective and not binding upon her rights, has cast a cloud on her title. These circumstances culminated into the filing of this suit.