- (1.) The appellants herein claim to be the owner of premises No. 7-B Narkalbagal Lane, calcutta. Their case is that they have taken this premises in exchange of their property in ducca Town in Bangladesh. The plaintiffs' further case is that the defendant has encroached on their land having nine inches in the parapet and further encroached one of his walls by using that wall as the wall of his own privy. Under these circumstances, the plaintiffs brought a suit for declaration, removal of encroachment and injunction. The trial court appointed a commissioner and the Commissioner found that there was no other encroachment except in respect of the construction of overhead tank. Consequently, the suit was decreed in part. Both the parties preferred separate appeals. The first appellate court allowed the appeal of the plaintiff and the suit was decreed in its entirety. That led the defendant to file a second appeal and the same was allowed in part by the High Court. With the result, the decree of the trial court was affirmed. It is against the said judgment, the appellants are in appeal before us.
(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants urged that in the absence of any substantial question of taw having been framed by the High Court, it was not open to the High court to have partly allowed the appeal of the defendant. It is true that no substantial question of law was framed as required under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. However, we examined the matter on merits and find that the judgment of the first appellate court was based on misreading of the evidence. Moreover, this is not a case where this Court is required to interfere with the matter. The dispute relates to an encroachment of few inches over the property and being fought before various courts for the last over forty years. We feel that substantial justice having been done between the parties the dispute must come to an end. We are, therefore, not deposed to interfere with the matter. The appeal fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.;