As per case facts, plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration of title and possession of a vacant site, claiming ownership through a registered sale deed from 1968. They alleged that ... defendants created invalid deeds and trespassed in 2007. Defendants claimed the property was ancestral and asserted title through a gift deed and a subsequent sale. Both the trial court and the first appellate court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, leading the defendants (Nos.1 and 2) to file a second appeal. The question arose whether the concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts were justified and if any substantial question of law warranted intervention in the second appeal. Finally, the High Court confirmed that the lower courts' findings were based on proper evidence appreciation, noting the presumption for the plaintiffs' thirty-year-old sale deed and the defendants' failure to prove their ancestral claim or produce key witnesses. The court found no substantial question of law and dismissed the appeal, upholding the plaintiffs' title and right to possession.