(1) SA. 890.2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 890 OF 2008 Shrihari S/o Dadarao Jadhav .. Appellant VERSUS Annasaheb S/o Dhondiram More and ors. .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13068 OF 2008 IN SECOND APEPAL NO. 890 OF 2008 Shrihari S/o Dadarao Jadhav .. Applicant VERSUS Annasaheb S/o Dhondiram More and ors. .. Respondents Mrs. M.A. Kulkarni, Advocate for the appellant-applicant Mr. A.N. Gadime, Advocate h/f. Mr. V.D. Gunale, Advocate for the respondent nos. 1 to 5 CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 9TH OCTOBER, 2009 P.C.:- 1] The appellant is challenging the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below that on the western boundary of his lands gat no. 122 and 121, there existed a cartway. The western boundary of the above mentioned land goes upto the eastern- western flowing stream. Though it is not properly stated in the plaint, the appellant’s contention (2) SA. 890.2008 seems to be that the respondents are trying to widen the cartway at it’s fag end near the stream. This grievance is not reflected in the plaint and precisely for this reason, the Courts below dismissed the suit. 2] Mrs. Kulkarni the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant sought to withdraw the suit and sought liberty to file fresh suit to prevent the defendants widening the cartway that existed on the western boundary of only the land gat no. 121. (Boundary between land gat no. 116 and 121). This suggestion apparently gives rise to a different cause of action, and I think the appellant should have an opportunity to agitate this grievance in a fresh suit. 3] The Second Appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. Liberty is granted as mentioned above. In view of the dismissal of the Second Appeal, Civil Application no. 13068 of 2008 seeking injunction does not survive, and the same stands dismissed. Sd/- (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) arp