vide sale deed dated 04.12.1978, and, accordingly, the entries were made in the revenue record. It was further stated that, as per revenue record, the land was not given to defendants No. 1 and 2, because the order of the Consolidation Authorities, was not correct. At the time of consolidation, defendants No. 1 and 2, became the owner in possession of the land, measuring 31 kanals 4 marlas, comprising muraba No. 123, killa No. 4(8-2), 5(5-12), 7(5-12), 7(8-0), 8 min East (4-0) Deep Chand, father of the plaintiffs raised objection, in view of Section 21(II), which was accepted by the Consolidation Authorities, and, accordingly, killas Nos. 115/19-20-2122-23 and 23/1-2-3-8-9, were allotted, in favour of defendants No. 1 and 2, and they filed an appeal, which was accepted, but the old numbers were given to them. It was further stated that defendants No. 1 and 2, again filed an appeal, in view of Section 21(10) before the Assistant Consolidation Officer, Rohtak, vide which, their appeal, was accepted, but the old numbers, were not given to them. Therefore, in view of Section 42 of the Consolidation Act, the appeal, was filed, before the Director, Consolidation Haryana, which was accepted, but the land was not given to them, according to the record. It was further stated that Civil Writ No. 2562 of 1990, was filed by defendant No.1, in Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh, vide which, the parties, were directed to approach the Civil Court, regarding their claims. It was further stated that on 09.09.1989, a compromise, was effected, between the parties, and accordingly, the land of defendants No. 1 and 2, was given to them, and as per terms and conditions of the said compromise, Civil Suit No. 134 of 1991, was decreed, vide judgement and decree dated 12.01.1996. It was further stated that mutation No. 2225 dated 07.04.1999, was also sanctioned, in terms of the said judgement and decree, and, accordingly, the land measuring 8 kanals 3
