JUDGMENT :

VIRINDER AGGARWAL, J.

1. Commencing with a formulation designed for judicial clarity and precision, it is pertinent to note at the outset that the present Regular Second Appeal (hereinafter referred to as “RSA”) has been preferred by the appellants/plaintiffs, assailing the legality, propriety, and correctness of the judgment and decree dated 04.03.1994 rendered by the learned District Judge, Kurukshetra, whereby the findings of the trial Court were affirmed in their entirety. The trial Court, vide judgment and decree dated 07.03.1992 passed by the learned Sub-Judge Ist Class, Kurukshetra, had dismissed the suit instituted by the appellants/plaintiffs seeking a declaratory decree coupled with consequential relief of permanent injunction.

1.1. By way of the present appeal, the appellants/plaintiffs seek to challenge the concurrent findings recorded by both the Courts below, contending that such findings are fraught with manifest errors of law, misappreciation of evidence, and factual inconsistencies, thereby rendering the impugned judgments and decrees unsustainable in law. The appellants submit that the learned Courts below failed to properly consider the material placed on