1 SBCivil Second Appeal No.110/2010 Sharwan Lal v. Board of Municipal, Parbatsar & Anr. Date of Order :: 6 th July, 2010 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. Vishal Sharma, for the appellant. .... This appeal as per provisions of Section 100 Code of Civil Procedure is preferred to challenge the judgment and decree dated 26.5.2010 passed by learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track), Parbatsar affirming the judgment and decree dated 10.7.2007 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Parbatsar in Civil Original Suit No.28/2002. The contention of of learned counsel for the appellant is that even if the plaintiff appellant failed to establish his title on the property in question, he could have not been dispossessed therefrom without adopting due procedure of law, thus, the courts below erred while rejecting the suit for permanent injunction on basis of failure to prove title. I have examined the judgments passed by the courts below. 2 It is pertinent to note that by relying upon the documents Ex.A/10, A/11, A/12, A/13 and A/16 both the courts below have given a concurrent finding that the plaintiff appellant neither had title nor possession as his encroachment was removed even prior to filing suit. By relying upon the documents aforesaid specific finding is given that the plaintiff appellant was not having any possession over the property concerned. As such there is no factual foundation to provide any creedal to the substantial question sought to be agitated. The concurrent findings given by the courts below do not require any disturbance, thus, the appeal is dismissed. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. kkm/ps.