ORDER : Mr. Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - This civil second appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 19.09.2018 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jhalawar (for brevity, "the learned Appellate Court") in Civil Appeal No.14/2016 whereby, while dismissing the appeal, the judgment dated 29.02.2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge Jhalawar (for brevity, "learned trial Court") decreeing the civil suit No.2/2007 preferred by the respondents/plaintiffs (for brevity, "plaintiffs") for mandatory and permanent injunction, has been upheld. 2. The relevant facts in brief are that the plaintiffs filed a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction against the appellant/defendant (for brevity, "the defendant") stating therein that the defendant was allotted 5 bigha of land out of Khasra No.830 for construction of market; but, in the garb of construction on the land allotted to it, the defendant was trying to encroach upon the public way being used by the residents of village Ratlai comprising of Khasra No.68 measuring 1 bigha 18 biswa. After recording evidence of the respective parties, the suit was decreed by the learned trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 29.02.2016 whereby, the defendant was directed to remove the construction raised on the land of Khasra No.796, the public way and it was restrained from causing any obstruction in its use by the residents of Village Ratlai. The civil first appeal preferred there against by the defendant has been dismissed by the learned Appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 19.09.2018. 3. Assailing the impugned judgment and decree, the learned counsel for the defendant submitted that the finding of the learned Courts are against the evidence on record. She submitted that the learned Courts did not appreciate that the defendant has raised construction on the land of Khasra No.830, allotted to it. She, therefore, prays that the civil second appeal be allowed, the judgment and decree dated 19.09.2018 be quashed and set aside and the civil suit filed by the plaintiffs be dismissed. 4. Heard. Considered. 5. While deciding the Issues No.2 & 3, the learned trial Court has, on the basis of evidence on record, recorded a categorical finding that the defendant has obstructed the public way comprising of Khasra No.796 which was never allotted to it. 4. Heard. Considered. 5. While deciding the Issues No.2 & 3, the learned trial Court has, on the basis of evidence on record, recorded a categorical finding that the defendant has obstructed the public way comprising of Khasra No.796 which was never allotted to it. The learned Court also relied upon the Commissioner's Report prepared in presence of the Revenue Officials which reflected encroachment by the defendant over the land of public way. These findings have been affirmed and upheld by the learned Appellate Court re-appreciating the evidence on record. Learned counsel for the defendant has miserably failed to satisfy this Court that the findings of fact so recorded by the learned Courts based on appreciation of Courts suffer from any illegality, infirmity, perversity or jurisdictional error so as to warrant interference of this Court under section 100 CPC. 6. Since, the civil second appeal is devoid of any substantial question of law, the same is dismissed. 7. The stay application also stands disposed of.