1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by a plaintiff, against the dismissal by the High Court, of his Regular Second Appeal.
2. ' The petitioner claiming to be the owner of an evacuee property measuring 2 Kanals 7 Marlas asserted that the respondents had occupied the same as his licensees. It was further asserted that the respondents had refused to vacate the suit property, therefore, the petitioner was compelled to file a suit. On the other hand a suit was also filed from the respondents' side claiming right to and possession of 1 Kanal 6 Marlas of land. It was instituted against the petitioner with a view to establish their right on the same. The petitioner having lost up to the High Court has now sought leave to appeal.
3. The arguments raised by the learned counsel related to findings of fact which have been rendered against the petitioner. The contention that they are based on misreading of evidence is without any force as there is neither any misreading nor any important piece of evidence has been ignored. Accordingly, finding no justification for interference, leave to appeal is refused.