(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants.
(2.) This second appeal arises out of the judgment and decree dated 30.3.2006 passed by the lower appellate court whereby after reversing the findings recorded by the trial court, the appellants' suit for permanent injunction has been dismissed.
(3.) The plaintiffs-appellants filed a suit for the relief of permanent injunction to restrain the respondents-defendants from carving out any Rasta or otherwise interfering into their possession over plot No. 653. The suit was contested by the respondents-defendants stating that the plaintiffs-appellants are though the owners of plot No. 653, had encroached upon the Chak road land of plot No. 652 and since that land is public pathway, they are not entitled to any permanent injunction.