Defendants are the appellants. The courts below found that the plaintiffs are in possession of plot A and plot A1 shown in Ext.C3(a) plan. Though the defendants/appellants contend that the southern boundary of the plaintiffs property is along line 245 and 170 shown in Ext.C3(a) plan, that was found to be not acceptable to the Advocate Commissioner. In the first report filed, it is stated that along the line A4 - A7 (measuring 282 links) there is no physical boundary. The courts below analysed all the aspects and came to the conclusion that the plaintiffs are entitled to get a decree for injunction. It is a finding on fact. No substantial question of law is involved in this Second Appeal.
S.A. No: 128/2001 -2- In the result this Second Appeal is dismissed without cost.
Sd/-
N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A. to Judge jjj