1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 405 /2010 (Vinayak s/o Wamanrao Tople vs. Shantabai Namdeo Dod ) .................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... CORAM : SMT.VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATED : 20th October, 2010. Heard Mr C.A. Joshi, the learned counsel for the appellant and Mr A.J. Thakkar, the learned counsel for the respondent. The appellant is the original defendant. A suit was filed by the plaintiff for eviction and possession of the suit property. According to the plaintiff, the property was situated within the Gram Panchayat limits of Mothi Umri District Akola. The plaintiff claimed that the tenancy of the defendant was terminated by a valid notice dated 31.7.2003. The plaintiff claimed a decree for arrears of rent to the tune of Rs. 12,000/-. The defendant denied the claim of the plaintiff and also denied that the plaintiff was entitled to arrears of rent to the tune of Rs. 12,000/-. According to the defendant, the tenancy was validly terminated by the notice dated 31.7.2003. The defendant pleaded that he had carried out repairs to the suit property to the extent 2 of Rs. 10,000/- and, therefore, the defendant claimed a set off in regard to that amount. The trial Court, on an appreciation of evidence on record, held that the notice dated 31.7.2003 was not valid and proper. The trial Court, further, held that the defendant was not entitled to claim the set off for an amount of Rs. 10,000/-. The suit of the plaintiff as well as the claim for the set off was dismissed by the trial Court. In an appeal filed by the plaintiff, the first Appellate Court reversed the finding recorded by the trial Court in regard to the validity of the notice of termination dated 31.7.2003. The first Appellate Court held that the property was situated within the Gram Panchayat limits of of Mothi Umri and the provisions of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act were not applicable to the facts of the case. Since the defendant had not filed any appeal against the dismissal of the claim for set off, the first Appellate Court held that the defendant was not entitled to claim a set off for an amount of Rs. 10,000/-. The findings recorded by the first Appellate Court are pure findings of fact, based on proper appreciation of the the evidence on record. They do not give rise to any substantial question of law. The first Appellate Court rightly did not grant a set off as the defendant had not filed any appeal against the rejection of his claim for setting off an amount of Rs. 10,000/-. 3 Since the findings recorded by the first Appellate Court do not give rise to any substantial question of law, the Second Appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE sahare