https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458561 Second appeal interference is confined to substantial questions of law, and no fresh re-appreciation of evidence is permitted; here, the concurrent findings were based on the record, including rejection of the local commissioner's report and the plaintiff's failure to establish the factual foundation of the suit, so no interference was warranted. The plaintiff also failed to prove title or settled possession over the disputed land, as sporadic revenue entries and oral evidence did not establish ownership against government land, while the plaintiff produced no legally recognized title documents and did not discharge the burden of proof. The injunction claim was therefore unsustainable, and the dismissal of the suit was upheld. en-us Tue, 01 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Nov 2024 19:52:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458561 Second appeal interference is confined to substantial questions of law, and no fresh re-appreciation of evidence is permitted; here, the concurrent findings were based on the record, including rejection of the local commissioner's report and the plaintiff's failure to establish the factual foundation of the suit, so no interference was warranted. The plaintiff also failed to prove title or settled possession over the disputed land, as sporadic revenue entries and oral evidence did not establish ownership against government land, while the plaintiff produced no legally recognized title documents and did not discharge the burden of proof. The injunction claim was therefore unsustainable, and the dismissal of the suit was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 01 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458561