HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO SECOND APPEAL No. 464 of 1998 DATED 23RD SEPTEMBER, 2010. BETWEEN Ananta Kumar …Appellant and Sakharam and ors …Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO SECOND APPEAL No. 464 of 1998 JUDGMENT: The unsuccessful plaintiﬀ is the appellant herein, who ﬁled the Second Appeal invoking Section 100 CPC inter alia seeking to assail the correctness of the judgment and decree dated 11.09.1997 whereby the learned Subordinate Judge, Nirmal, dismissed A.S.No. 17 of 1994 and conﬁrmed the judgment and decree dated 30.06.1994 passed in O.S.No. 24 of 1983 by the learned District Munsif, Bhainsa. The facts in brief are that the appellant/plaintiﬀ ﬁled suit in O.S.No. 24 of 1983 on the ﬁle of the District Munsif, Bhainsa, for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The said suit was contested by the respondents/defendants, mainly contending that there was earlier partition, and the same has been suppressed by the appellant/plaintiﬀ. After regular trail, the trial Court dismissed the suit. The appeal in A.S.No. 17 of 1994 preferred by the appellant/plaintiﬀ against the judgment and decree of the trial Court in the aforesaid suit, came to be dismissed by the lower appellate Court conﬁrming the ﬁndings of the trial Court. Both the Courts below concurrently held that the appellant/plaintiﬀ suppressed the material aspects as regards the earlier partition and therefore the appellant/plaintiﬀ is not entitled to the relief as prayed for. Heard. Perused the record. I see no question of law, much less a substantial question of law, warranting interference with the concurrent ﬁndings of the Courts below while exercising powers under Section 100 CPC. The Second Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ------------------------------------------ JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO 23RD SEPTEMBER, 2010. Msnr.