PRAFULLA C.PANT, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the appellant and pe­rused the impugned judgment and decree dated 14.9.2005, passed by the Trial Court (Civil Judge (JD), Udham Singh Nagar) in Suit No. 80 of 2001, and judgment and de­cree dated 6.3.2007, passed by the Lower Appellate Court (District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar) in Civil Appeal No. 89 of 2005.
(2.) THERE is concurrent finding of fact on the record that plaintiff/appellant failed to prove his possession over the land in suit. There is further concurrent finding of fact that plaintiff failed to prove that the defendants were not using the land in question (Nazuh land) for their passage. As such, both the Courts below declined to grant injunction, sought by the plaintiff in suit, restraining the defendants from inter­fering in the possession of the plaintiff. Having heard learned Counsel for the appellant and after going through both the impugned judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below, since there is no substantial question of law involved in this appeal, the appeal is liable to be dismissed summarily.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY , the second appeal is dismissed, summarily. Appeal Dismissed.;