the plaintiff, are based on cogent evidence led before the Courts below and correct appreciation of the evidence by the Courts below and, therefore, such findings of facts cannot be said to be perverse, in any manner, and the said orders do not give rise to any substantial question of law in this second appeal of the defendants and this second appeal of the appellants-defendants-Mangi Lal & Ors. deserves to be dismissed being devoid of any merit. On perusal of the record, this Court is satisfied that from perusal of the Commissioner's Report, it is very much clear that the disputed plot of land is situated within the Aaraji No. 6402 and on the southern side of the same, there is a hospital on its eastern side and on the northern side, there is a State Highway and further ahead on northern side and on the other side of the State Highway, there is a residential house of Mangi Lal. The temple structure is situated in the southern side of the adjacent Aaraji No. 6427 and not Aaraji No. 6402, therefore, the Courts below have rightly injuncted the defendants from not interfering with the possession and title of the plaintiff on the basis of a registered sale deed executed in his favour in the year 1999. In these circumstances, no interference is called for in the decree concurrently granted by the Courts below and this second
