1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL 567 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.12236 OF 2010. _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|_______________________________________ CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 27.08.2010. 1. The appellants assail concurrent findings of facts of both the Courts below. The present Respondent had filed a suit for injunction against the present appellant/original defendant on the ground that Gat No.64 admeasuring 85 Ares is the joint family property. The defendant is interfering in the possession without any authority. The defendant claimed that he had agreed to purchase the southern part of Gat No.64 from Annarao to the extent of 1 acre 2 gunthas. The said Annarao had 1/3rd share. There is no proof of partition having taken place. So also, there is no proof that Annarao was in exclusive possession of the southern part of Gat No.64. Even the agreement of sale relied by the appellants does not prove the case of the appellants inasmuch as the northern boundary is shown to be that of Hariba who is certainly not the owner of Gat No.64. 2. The appellants claim to be in possession since 1990. There is no proof of the same. Even no entry was recorded in the revenue till the year 2003-2004. Both the Courts have dealt with the evidence on record. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest the possession of the present appellants over the suit property. 3. In light of the same, no error can be found with the judgments of the Courts below. In the result, the Second Appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. 4. In view of dismissal of Second Appeal, C.A. does not survive and it is accordingly disposed of. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.27.08.2010. asp/office/sa567.10