1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Second Appeal No. 327 of 2009 1. NIRMALABAI WD/O SHANKARLAL JAISWAL AND 8 ORS R/O WADAMBA, RAMTEK, NAGPUR 2. PRAKASH S/O SHANKARLAL JAISWAL R/O WADAMBA, RAMTEK, NAGPUR 3. AJAY S/O SHANKARLAL JAISWAL R/O WADAMBA, RAMTEK, NAGPUR 4. PAPABAI D/O SHANKARLAL JAISWAL R/O WADAMBA, RAMTEK, NAGPUR 5. LATABAI D/O SHANKARLAL JAISWAL R/O WADAMBA, RAMTEK, NAGPUR 6. ASHABAI D/O SHANKARLAL JAISWAL R/O WADAMBA, RAMTEK, NAGPUR 7. USHABAI D/O SHANKARLAL JAISWAL R/O WADAMBA, RAMTEK, NAGPUR 8. RAJU S/O SHANKARLAL JAISWAL R/O WADAMBA, RAMTEK, NAGPUR 9. SAGARLAL S/O MOHANLAL JAISWAL R/O WADAMBA, RAMTEK, NAGPUR .. PETITIONER/S VERSUS 1. BHARATLAL S/O MOHANLAL JAISWAL R/O WADAMBA, RAMTEK, NAGPUR .. RESPONDENT/S - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. A.S. Chandurkar, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. S.A. Deole, Advocate, for the resondent. 2 CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : AUGUST 27 , 2009 . Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The appellants are the original defendants. A suit was filed by the plaintiff for a declaration that he was the owner of the suit property and the defendants have forcibly dispossessed him from the same. The defendants had claimed that they were the owners of the suit property as the same were allotted to their shares in the oral partition effected in the year 1951. Both the Courts concurrently held that the suit fields fell to the share of the original plaintiff and the defendant nos. 1 and 2 had dispossessed the plaintiff in the year 1990. The Courts held that the suit was filed within the prescribed period of limitation. The Courts, therefore, granted a declaration that the plaintiff was the owner of the suit property and also held that he was entitled to possession of Field Survey No. 171 (old) and 87 (new) of village Wadamba. The findings recorded by both the Courts are based on a proper appreciation of the material evidence on record. They do not give rise to any substantial question of law. The second appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE RMP