1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 17. SA/192/2009 _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office } Memoranda of Coram, } Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's } orders or directions } and Registrar's orders } ___________________________}___________________________________ Mr. V.H. Dighe, Advocate for appellant. Mr. V.S. Bedre, Advocate for respondents. [CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J ] Date : 05th April, 2010. PER COURT : 1 Heard. 2 The plaintiff being dis-satisfied has questioned the concurrent findings in second appeal. 3 The plaintiff asserts that there is encroachment of 1 ½ gunthas of land Gat no. 274 by owners of land Gat no. 273. The court on analysis of evidence of cadestral surveyor and map at Ex. 80 found that the map has not depicted correct position. The plaintiff basically 2 failed by virtue of the evidence of cadestral surveyor to establish the encroachment. Secondly, the plaintiff could not establish that encroachment of 1 ½ gunthas was within a period of 12 years. The evidence demonstrated, the plaintiff did not examine his father. The defendants established the possession to be since decades. Consequently, findings of both the courts can not be said to be perverse. Second appeal dismissed. No costs. [K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.] tsk/sa192.09