It may be noticed that the facts are not very much in dispute. It is not disputed that the plaintiff.respondent is in possession of the house in question, as alleged by him, being son of Arjan Singh who admittedly is owner of the suit property. It is also not in dispute that width of the road in between the house in question and the Civil Hospital of the defendant.appellants is 82 ½’. Further there is nothing on record to suggest that there is any encroachment on the part of the plaintiff.respondent. Not only this, even the defendant.appellants have taken a categoric stand in their written statement that there is no question of demolition of the house of the plaintiff.respondent. In view thereof, no exception can be taken to the findings so recorded by the lower appellate Court. Thus, the substantial question of law, as raised, is answered against the appellants.