Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) The petitioners, who are defendants in Title Suit No.16 of 2009, are aggrieved of order dated 26.08.2016 passed in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 03 of 2010 by which challenge to order dated 31.05.2010 passed in Title Suit No.16 of 2009 has been rejected.
(2.) Title Suit No. 16 of 2009 has been instituted for a decree for declaration of title and restoration of possession. In Title Suit No. 16 of 2009, order dated 25.07.2006 passed in Case No. 39 of 2001 by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Koderma has been assailed. Initially, proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C was started which was subsequently converted into a proceeding under Section 147 Cr.P.C. The matter thereafter came before the District and Sessions Judge, Koderma in Criminal Revision No. 25 of 2007. In the Title Suit, application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 CPC was filed by the plaintiff. This application has been allowed by the trial Judge holding that the plaintiff has a prima-facie case, who has disclosed his possession over the suit land and thus the balance of convenience lies in his favour. These findings have been affirmed by the Appellate Court by a detailed judgment. In the present proceeding, the petitioners have failed to demonstrate any illegality in the order passed by the Appellate Court. Thus, there is a concurrent finding of facts by the two courts which, in absence of any error committed by the courts below, cannot be set-aside by this Court.
(3.) Viewed thus and for the reasons indicated hereinabove, finding no merit in the writ petition it is dismissed.;