(1.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we find no merit in the appeal.
(2.) As per the plaint instituted by respondent No. 3 before the court of SDM the suit land was under the khatedari of the father of respondent No.3 prior to 1955. On the death of his father on 02/03/1965, the khatedari was entered in the revenue record in his name. But since he was a minor it was recorded that the mother would be the guardian. Because he was a minor he could not till the land and his mother allowed the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants to till the same as a share cropper.
(3.) At the trial the plaintiff proved the Jamabandi Ex.P.1, P.2 and P.3 as also the mutation entry Ex.P.4. The predecessor-in-interest of the appellants proved khasra entries Exhibits P.1, P.2, P.3, P.4 and P.5.