IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SA No.199 of 2000 SIYARAM SAHANI & ANR Versus ANUP SAHANI & ORS ----------- 9 14.8.2008 Heard learned counsel for the appellants. This second appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs- appellants- appellants against the judgment of affirmance. The instant matter arises out of Title suit no. 226/1988 which was filed on 5.7.1988 by the appellants for declaration of title, recovery of possession and also cost and mesne profit with respect to Schedule II land mentioned in the plaint. The said suit was dismissed by the learned Munsif, Begusarai vide judgment and decree dated 27.11.1992 which was challenged by the plaintiffs in Title Appeal no. 36/1992 which was also dismissed by the learned 3rd Addl. District Judge, Begusarai vide his judgment and decree dated 20.12.1999. Against the aforesaid judgments and decree of the learned courts below the instant second appeal has been filed. From the perusal of materials on records and the impugned judgments and decree of the learned courts below, it is quite apparent that both the learned courts below - 2 - arrived at concurrent findings that the plaintiffs were claiming on the basis of deed of transfer dated 16.6.1986 executed by their vendor whereas the brother of the said vendor had already transferred the said land by a registered deed dated 16.4.1985 (Exhibit B/3). The plaintiffs had not challenged the said deed, namely, Exhibit B/3 and the suit was also filed beyond the period of limitation. Both the learned courts below have also found that plaintiffs had failed to prove their case by any reliable evidence and law is well settled that they can not take benefit of weakness of defendants’ case. Both the learned courts below have found that the defendants were in possession of the suit premises and the plaintiffs were not in possession of the suit premises and in addition thereto the plaintiffs had failed to prove even their title in the suit property by any valid material. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any illegality in the impugned judgment and decree of the learned courts below nor any substantial question of law involved in the instant second appeal which is accordingly, dismissed. shahid ( S. N.Hussain, J)