JUDGMENT B.D. Agarwal, J. - Heard learned counsel. 2. The appellate court has taken into consideration the report submitted by the survey commissioner in the trial court with respect to the question whether the land in dispute lies within plot No. 133-Kha as claimed by the plaintiffs-appellants. It is pointed out that the survey commissioner did not verify the points F1, F2, F3 which he assumed as fixed and on the basis whereof he proceeded to make the measurements. For this reason especially he considered the survey report as unreliable. This apart on consideration of both documentary and oral evidence, the lower appellate court has recorded a categorical finding to the effect that the plaintiff-appellants are not shown to have been in possession over the said land. This being the position no substantial issue of law can be said to survive in the second appeal. The appeal is in, consequence dismissed under Order 41, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.