Evidence-supported concurrent findings of possession raise no substantial question of law on second appeal.

The plaintiffs sought a permanent injunction concerning 20 guntas in Sy. No. 72/1A-P1, claiming their father had purchased the land, retained it after selling a portion, and that they succeeded to his possession.

The appellant-defendant claimed that his family had long occupied a house and adjoining site identified as Khatha No. 773, but the courts found that his documents did not establish that Khatha No. 773 fell within the suit property.

The Trial Court decreed the suit; the First Appellate Court dismissed the appellant’s appeal and affirmed the decree.

The appellant then filed this second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

1. Whether the concurrent findings that the plaintiffs were in lawful possession of the suit property and that the appellant had failed to establish possession over it warranted interference in second appeal.

2. Whether the appeal raised a substantial question of law permitting its admission under Section 100 CPC.

Section 100 CPC confines a regular second appeal to cases involving a substantial question of law.

Concurrent findings of fact by the trial and first appellate courts do not warrant interference where they are supported by the evidence and no substantial question of law arises.

The judgment cites no specific precedent or additional statutory provision.

The High Court noted that both lower courts had found the plaintiffs’ sale deed, revenue records and tax receipts supported their claim of possession, while the appellant’s documents concerning Khatha No. 773 did not establish that it was situated within the suit survey number.

In the absence of acceptable evidence rebutting those findings, the High Court concluded that the concurrent factual determinations disclosed no substantial question of law for consideration under Section 100 CPC.

Leaving undisturbed the decree granting the plaintiffs a permanent injunction and its confirmation by the First Appellate Court.