JUDGMENT Sureshwar Thakur, J. - The plaintiff''s suit, bearing No. 61/2005, wherethrough, she claimed rendition, of, a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction, for, hence restraining the defendants/respondents herein (for short "the defendants''), from, interfering, in, the management control, of, the plaintiff/appellant herein (for short the plaintiff), vis-a-vis, the "Sarai"/suit property (a) and, also claimed therein, the, relief, vis-a-vis, if during the pendency of the afore lis, before the learned trial Court, the defendants, become successful, in obtaining possession hence, of, the suit premises, thereupon, a decree, of, possession becoming pronounced, vis-a-vis, her, and, qua the afore suit property, rather became dismissed, (b) and, in an appeal bearing No. 134 of 2015, as become carried therefrom, by, the aggrieved plaintiff, before the learned Additional District Judge (I) Una, the latter made a decision, in, affirmation thereto. 2. The plaintiff obviously becomes aggrieved, from, the afore made concurrently recorded verdicts, hence, by both the Courts below, and, through rearing the extant RSA, before this Court, she has strived to beget reversal, of, the afore concurrently made verdicts. 3. A perusal of the revenue records, as, appertaining to the suit property, and, as become respectively embodied, in, Ex. P-3, Ex.P-4 and Ex.P-5, hence unfold qua all embodying therein, hence, in, the column of ownership thereof, vis-a-vis, the suit property, becoming reflected, to, become owned, by, Gram Panchayat Deh, and, in the column of possession thereof, the, Makbuja Bashindgan Deh, become borne therein. The innate import, of, the afore enunciation(s), as, borne in the afore revenue records, as, appertaining to the suit property, is qua, the inhabitants, of, the village, hence holding the apposite rights, in, the suit property, hence owned, by, Gram Panchayat Deh. 4. For conclusively determining, the, genre and nature, of, the rights hence bestowed, in, the Bashindgan Deh, vis-a-vis, the suit property, as, becomes described, in the apposite column, of, ownership, to, become owned by Panchayat Deh, (a) rather a perusal, of, the signatured statement made by the plaintiff, in, Civil Suit No. 454, is, imperative, case whereof, became instituted, by the plaintiff herein, against one Udho Ram, (b) wherein the plaintiff, who instituted the afore case, makes vivid echoings, rather reflective vis-a-vis the suit property, bearing the trait, of, debutter property. The imperative innate connotation thereof, is, qua the plaintiff acquiescing vis-a-vis the suit property, bearing the trait, of, debutter property, (a) especially, when the afore made statement, on 21.3.1958, by the plaintiff is not contested, to be suffering, from, any vice of any falsity, nor, also when she contests vis-a-vis hers not making the afore statement. The further corollary thereof, is, qua the suit property, conclusively acquiring the trait and characteristic, of, debutter property, (a) and, hence when she became barred, to, on demise of her predecessor-in-interest hence stake any successory right(s) thereon, (b) rather thereupon also she contrarily becomes concomitantly debarred, to, successfully claim, the, pronouncement, of, the espoused relief of injunction, vis-a-vis, her, and, against the defendants besides qua the debutter suit property. 5. Conspicuously, also, with nuance, of, rights, as become invested in the apposite revenue records, upon, the Bashindgan Deh, is, qua theirs holding a right, to, stake a claim, vis-a-vis, the debutter suit property, (a) whereon uncontrovertedly, hence, a "Saray" is existing, and, when the afore rights, as, become vested in the Bashindgan Deh, and, as become enunciated in the afore revenue records, obviously, draws, an inference vis-a-vis, the village body hence holding, a right, qua theirs collectively rather ensuring the management, and, looking after, of, the apposite debutter suit property, (b) and, also further onwards, when no evidence also becomes adduced, for repelling the efficacy, of, truth, as, enjoyed by the afore revenue entries, as, borne in the apposite revenue records, wherein, the Panchayat Deh, is, recorded to be owner, of, the suit property, (c) thereupon the plaintiff becomes absolutely debarred, from, claiming any right, vis-a- vis, the suit property nor also she can befittingly strive, for, a relief of injunction or of possession, becoming pronounced visa-vis, the suit property, and, qua her. 6. Be that as it may, a perusal of Ex. 6. Be that as it may, a perusal of Ex. DW-5/B, wherethrough a committee, of, seven members rather became constituted, by the Naib Tehsildar, Bharwain, for, the requisite purpose, does completely throw out, the contention reared, by the plaintiff, vis-a-vis, the constituted management, for looking after the "Saray" hence suffering from any element of ineptitude, in the latter hence managing, the, debutter suit property, (a) rather contrarily, when the Naib Tehsildar, Bharwain, given, the property becoming described, in, the apposite revenue records, to be held as owner, by, Panchayat Deh, and with, in the column of possession thereof, the Bashindgan Deh, as aforestated, holds a right to collectively carry forward, the, purpose of public dedication, of, the debutter suit property, rather has evidently constituted, the, apposite valid management committee, (b) for, therethroughs, its hence ensuring its apt maintenance, and, also for ensuring qua its becoming befittingly looked after, (c) thereupon, the plaintiff has no right, to, in any capacity, make any interference, in, the management and taking care of the suit property, by, a validly constituted committee, nor she can espouse, for, a decree of injunction, becoming pronounced, hence for restraining, the, defendants, from theirs, hence, carrying forward, the, management, and, taking care, of, the debutter suit property, if they are members, of, the management committee. 7. Dehors the above, upon eruption, of, any proven mis-management or ineptitude, hence, by the Management Committee concerned rather in its looking after and taking care, of, the debutter suit property, (a) thereupon the apt suit was institute-able, only, after the apposite provisions, of Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, becoming recoursed, also thereafter averments were enjoined to be embodied, in, the plaint, rather reflective, vis-a-vis, there being gross ineptitude, and, mismanagement rather in the management of the debutter suit property, by the afore duly constituted committee, (b) however none of the afore valid recoursings, were, either made by the plaintiff nor the afore averments, occur in the plaint, whereas only, upon, the afore recoursings, and, upon the afore averments becoming enunciated in the plaint, rather the suit became appropriately constituted, thereupon for wants aforesaid, rather, begets the apt sequel, in as much, as, the suit becoming misconstituted. 8. In view of the above, the present appeal stands dismissed, and, hence the impugned verdict is maintained, and, affirmed. No question of law much less, a, substantial question of law arises for determination. 8. In view of the above, the present appeal stands dismissed, and, hence the impugned verdict is maintained, and, affirmed. No question of law much less, a, substantial question of law arises for determination. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.