JUDGMENT : SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. 1. The plaintiff, is, aggrieved by the verdict, rendered, by the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Kullu, upon, Civil Suit No. 61 of 2004, wherethrough, the afore civil suit, stood dismissed, with costs. Hence the plaintiff, through, the instant civil revision petition, strives to cast a challenge thereon, and, obviously, hence, strives, to, beget reversal, of, the afore verdict. 2. Shorn off un-necessary details, the paramount reason(s), which hence prevailed, upon, the learned trial Judge, to, dismiss the suit, is, hinged upon, the plaintiffs a) pro-actively indulging in vices, of, suppressio veri, and, suggestio falsi b) vice(s) whereof are, reflected in the impugned verdict, to stand generated, by the plaintiff, concealing the factum, qua his rearing earlier suits, wherein, stood carried, suit khasra Nos rather analogous, vis-`-vis, the suit property hereat, and, c) also, wherein the contesting litigants, thereat hence bore commonality, vis-`-vis, the contesting litigants hereat, d) thereupon the principle, of, statutory estoppel, and, of constructive resjudicata, embodied in Section 11 of the CPC, provisions whereof stands extracted hereinafter: "Res judicata- No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, in a Court competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, and has been heard and finally decided by such Court." warranting theres' being squarely attracted, vis-`-vis, the extant suit, and, whereupon the extant suit, being mis-constituted, and, hence its warranting, its, dismissal. The afore assigned reasons, are well-merited, (e) as a perusal of the records, makes candid underlining(s), qua the verdict embodied, in, Ext. The afore assigned reasons, are well-merited, (e) as a perusal of the records, makes candid underlining(s), qua the verdict embodied, in, Ext. DW2/B, being rendered by the learned Civil Court concerned, upon Civil Suit No. 20 of 2002, in a lis, engaging, the plaintiff herein, and, the defendants herein, (f) and also it makes disclosures, qua the array of litigants therein, being similar to the array, of, litigants, hereat, (g) besides, the suit Khasra Nos, therein bear analogity, vis-`-vis, the suit Khasra Nos hereat, and, when a perusal of the afore verdict, also makes disclosure(s), (h) qua a declaration being pronounced, vis-a-vis, the defendant, Durga Singh, being declared, to, hold 1/4th Share in the entire suit property, borne in the suit Khasra Nos, (i) and further when, the afore verdict, has acquired conclusivity, also when in another suit, engaging the parties at contest hereat, and also appertaining, to, the suit Khasra Nos., hence bearing analogity, vis-`-vis, the suit Khasra Nos., hereat rather also stood instituted, before the learned trial Court, and, whereon also a binding and conclusive verdict, borne in Ext. DW2/A, stood rendered (j) and when a perusal thereof also discloses, qua the latter suit also being dismissed, it being mis-constituted, and, also upon its attracting, the, statutory embargo, of, the principle, of, res judicata, contemplated in Section 11, of, the CPC, (k) given earlier thereto, a binding and conclusive verdict, being rendered, interse the contesting litigants, hereat also hence bearing apposite analogity therewith, and with the suit Khasra Nos, in the earlier suit, bearing analogity, vis-`-vis, the suit Khasra Nos, in the latter suit, (l), and, when therein, the, sale deed of 20.12.1988, was held, to be validly executed, and, also it was held, that, hence therefrom the afore defendant Durga Singh, rather held, valid possession, of, the suit Khasra Nos., (l) thereupon with stark, and, evident attraction, vis-`-vis, the extant suit, hence the principles, of, constructive res judicata, and, of, statutory estoppel, (m) engendered from the earlier binding verdicts pronounced, upon, the earlier apposite similar litigations, interse the parties, at, contest hereat, (n) thereupon the vigor of the afore principle, of, statutory estoppel, and, of resjudicata, is fortified, and, the dismissal of the plaintiff's suit, in the afore manner, is well merited, and, does not merit any interference. 3. Consequently, there is no merit, in the instant petition, and, the same is dismissed. 3. Consequently, there is no merit, in the instant petition, and, the same is dismissed. The verdict pronounced by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn) Kullu, upon, Civil suit No. 61 of 2004, is affirmed, and, maintained. The pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of. No costs.