J U D G M E N T

Plaintiffs in a suit for fixation of boundary and permanent prohibitory injunction, are the appellants. Both the courts below have concurrently held that the plaintiffs are not entitled to the reliefs canvassed for, mainly basing that conclusion on a decision rendered in a previous suit as between the parties. Challenging the correctness of the decision so rendered non-suiting the plaintiffs as unsustainable under law and fact, the appeal is preferred.

2. Notice being given to consider the admissibility of the appeal, the respondents have entered appearance. I heard the counsel on both sides. Plaint 'A' schedule property belongs to the plaintiffs and plaint 'B' schedule to the defendants, and both of them are lying contiguously without any demarcating boundaries, was the case of the plaintiffs. Plaint 'B' schedule property lies on the east and south of plaint 'A' schedule and fixation of the boundaries of plaint 'A' schedule with that property on both sides and a perpetual prohibitory injunction against the defendants from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs over plaint 'A' schedule, was applied for in the suit. There was obstruction from