1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO.655 OF 2006 Gopal s/o Keshav Kotwal, since deceased through L.R. Appellant Versus The State of Maharashtra & others Respondents Mr.P.D.Bachate, advocate for the appellant. Mrs.S.S.Autade, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 12 th August, 2009. P.C.: 1 The appellant – unsuccessful plaintiff approached this Court raising exception to the concurrent judgments recorded by the Courts below. 2 Plaintiff instituted suit against defendants claiming relief in respect of perpetual injunction restraining defendants from giving effect to or implementing order in respect of allotment of plots, passed by the Collector on 13.08.1985. According to the plaintiff, allotment of plots by the Collector in favour of defendants is in respect of the portion which is already occupied by them by virtue of allotment. The occupants are in fact raising encroachment over the public road. It is the contention of plaintiff that his access to the road is obstructed by the occupants/defendants. The plaintiff, as such, claimed that order of 2 allotment of plots, passed by the Collector, being illegal, the authorities be restrained from implementing the order, so also defendants be restrained from committing encroachment over the public road. 3 After proper contest, learned Judge of the trial Court found that the plaintiff has failed to substantiate his case and as such, dismissed the suit. Appeal presented by the plaintiff before the first appellate Court, being Civil Appeal No.50 of 1997, also came to be dismissed by Ad hoc Additional District Judge, Nandurbar on 10.11.2003. 4 It is contended by appellant/plaintiff that so far as shop nos. 11 and 12 are concerned, order of allotment made by the Collector on 13.08.1985 has been withdrawn and allotment made in favour of concerned respondents/defendants came to be cancelled. The subsequent order of withdrawal of allotment has been passed by the Collector on 04.07.1988. The order passed by the Collector in respect of withdrawal of allotment of shops no.11 and 12 is subject matter of challenge of independent litigation and Second Appeal No.35/2004 arising out of those proceedings is pending for final disposal. The issue in respect of allotment of shop nos.11 and 12 as well as, as to whether said allottees, by virtue of their occupation of the shops, are responsible for causing encroachment on the public road, is a matter of consideration in pending litigation, being Second Appeal No.35 of 2004. Disposal of this Second Appeal will not, in any way, affect merits of the said case. Apart from this, as has been contended by the Counsel for appellant, the Collector has withdrawn the basic order in respect of allotment of shop in favour of concerned defendants on 04.07.1988 and there has not been 3 further restoration of the order in respect of allotment thereafter. In these circumstances, the decision rendered in this Second Appeal will have no impact on the pending litigation i. e. Second Appeal No.35/2004. So far as instant Second Appeal is concerned, it does not give rise to any substantial question of law. 5 Hence, instant Second Appeal is dismissed. Pending Civil Applications do not survive and stand disposed of accordingly. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* adb/sa65506