Judgment 1. Respondent plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction with a prayer that the petitioners defendants be restrained from interfering with his right to use the street, falling on one side of his plot. In that suit, he also moved an application for ad interim injunction, which was allowed. Petitioners failed in appeal. Both the Courts below, by referring to the site plan and contents of the sale deed, came to a conclusion that prima facie, existence of the street on one side of house of the respondent was proved on record. No case is made out for interference in pure findings of fact as no substantial question of law has been raised. Dismissed.