IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

RSA-2888-2022 (O&M)

Date of decision: 04.02.2026 Kurra Ram (since deceased) through LRs . . . . Appellant Vs.

Chanan (since deceased) through LRs and another . . . . Respondents ****

CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA ****

Present: - Mr. G.S. Dhindsa, Advocate, for the appellant.

****

DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

The present Regular Second Appeal has been preferred by the defendants - appellants challenging the judgments and decrees passed by the learned Trial Court dated 3.2.2018, and affirmed by the learned First Appellate Court on 6.9.2022, whereby the suit for possession filed by the plaintiffs has been decreed.

2. The appellants assail the concurrent findings primarily on the ground that the demarcation conducted during the pendency of the suit is unreliable and could not have been made the basis for decreeing the suit.

3. At the outset, it is apposite to notice that the scope of interference in a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is confined to cases involving a substantial question of law. Concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below are ordinarily binding and cannot be interfered with u