I do not find any illegality in the concurrent decree of the courts below dismissing the suit and decreeing the counter claim. The plaintiffs did not avail of the opportunity given by the lower appellate court to amend the plaint in tune with their documents of title. The plaintiffs could not establish their title or possession to the extent of 28 cents when Ext.A1 sale deed extends to 24.5 cents only. 2. The sale deed provides only a pathway of 3 feet width for the plaintiffs to have ingress and egress to their property. The courts below cannot therefore be faulted with in decreeing the counter claim restraining the plaintiffs from trespassing into the property in excess of 3 feet pathway granted to them. There is no question of law much less any substantial question of law in this Regular Second Appeal.
The Regular Second Appeal fails, dismissed.
Sd/-
V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.
nj.