CHUNNI LAL Vs. HARISH RAGHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant in the suit. The suit was filed for permanent injunction, which has been dismissed by the Trial Court, against which the appeal has been filed, which has also been dismissed by the impugned order dated 30.5.2011. Hence the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) I have considered the submission of learned Counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned order.

(3.) Admittedly, the appellant does not have a title over the suit property. The Court below has found that the allotment was not proper and plaintiff failed to prove the legal allotment. Further the finding has also been recorded that the plaintiff had also failed to prove the possession over the suit property. The findings of both the Courts below are finding of fact. No substantial question of law arises, which requires consideration.