respondents was filed as the plaintiff was trying to encroach upon the land of defendant but with the intervention of some known persons, the parties have entered into a compromise and same was admitted by PW-1 in his cross-examination. He also submitted that the issue no.3 was decided in favour of defendants and once issue no.3 was decided in their favour then, the plaintiff is not entitled for any decree or order in his favour. He also submitted that the plaintiff has filed a suit on false and manipulated grounds and the appellate court has rightly appreciated the material on record. He also submitted that there are no grounds for interference in the order passed by the appellate court. 11. Heard learned Senior Advocate for appellant plaintiff and learned counsel for respondent defendants. Perused the record. 12. A perusal of record indicated that issue no.3 was decided in favour of defendants which means that initially when the dispute arose between the parties and the defendants have filed a civil suit no. 208/1986, then, a compromise deed dated 05.12.1986 was executed between the parties and this compromise was exhibited as Ex. A/1. After this compromise Ex. A/1 this civil suit no. 208/1986 was dismissed as one of the condition in Ex. A/1 was abandoning the suit pending in the Court. Issue no.3 was decided in favour of defendants and the appellant plaintiff has not challenged this finding before the first appellate court. Thus, the first appellate court has affirmed the finding on issue no.3, therefore, the findings on issue no.3 is conclusive and binding on both the parties.
