Law:

Section:

This Civil Revision has been filed by Mirbaz Khan alias Bazi and two others against the judgment and decree passed by Civil Judge, Bannu on 18-11-19135 and affirmed by the Additional District Judge, Bannu vide his judgment dated 13-7-1987 whereby the suit for declaration and possession of land in dispute had been dismissed.

 2.  The relevant facts briefly are that the plaintiffs-petitioners filed a suit against the defendants-respondents for a declaration that petitioners 1 and 3 were owner-in-possession of 7/18 while petitioner No.2 of 41/144 shares out of land bearing Khasra No.497 measuring 2 kanals and 15 marlas situated in village Fatima Khel Kalan and further that they were tenants-in-possession thereof and that the entries in the Khasra Girdawari in Rabi, 1980 showing Atlas Khan respondent No.l as owner-in-possession and confirmation of this entry by the order dated 1-12-1980 of the Extra Assistant Commissioner was void and ineffective against the rights of the petitioners. According to the averments in the plaint, the petitioners were tenants-at-will of suit land since 1916-17. In Rabi, 1980 respondent No.l in collusion with Revenue Authorities got himself recorded as tenant-at-will. On the foot of this fictitious entry, respondent No.l also succeeded to get his so-called possession confirmed by the order dated 1-12-1980 of the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Bannu, under the proceedings under section 145 Cr.P.C. which were void and ineffective against their right and the wrong entries of the Revenue Record were liable to correction. Strangely enough a decree for possession of the suit land was also claimed in relief `Bany' of the heading of plaint alongwith perpetual injunction restraining respondent No.l to interfere with the petitioners' possession over the disputed land.

3.  The suit was contested by respondent No.l on the grounds which are reflected in the issues framed by the learned trial Judge. Crucial issues are No.1 and 4 which are to the following effect:-- .