1 Second Appeal 485 of 04. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 485 OF 2004 Arvindkumar S/o Meghshamrao Palkar, age about 51 years, Occu. Agril., R/o Pal, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad at present Nazgalli residing at Sarafa, Aurangabad. ... Appellant (Ori. Plaintiff) V E R S U S 1. Smt. Shubhangi W/o Vijaykumar Palkar,age 40 years, Occu. Household, R/o Pardeshiwada, Fakirwadi, Aurangabad. 2. Shankarrao S/o Markandrao Pathak, Age 60 years, Occu. Bhikushi, R/o as above (abated as per Court’s order dated 18-06-2009) ... Respondents (Ori. Defendants) WITH SECOND APPEAL No. 492 of 2004 Arvindkumar S/o Meghshamrao Palkar, age about 54 years, Occu. Agril., R/o Pal, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad at present Nazgalli residing at Sarafa, Aurangabad. ... Appellant (Ori. Plaintiff) V E R S U S 1. Amolkumar S/o Vijaykumar Palkar, Age 15 years 2. Abhijeet S/o Vijaykumar Palkar, age 11 years, Minor U/g of Smt. Shubhangi W/o Vijaykumar Palkar, age 40 years, Occu. Household, 2 Second Appeal 485 of 04. R/o Pardeshiwada, Fakirwadi, Aurangabad. 3. Smt. Shubhangi W/o Vijaykumar age 40 years, Occu. Household, R/o Pardeshiwada, Fakirwadi, Aurangabad. ... Respondents (Ori. Defendants) WITH CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5103 of 2008 Arvindkumar S/o Meghshamrao Palkar ... Applicant V/s. Amolkumar S/o Vijaykumar Palkar & others ... Respondents Mr. R.S. Deshmukh,Advocate for Appellant Shri S.V. Adwant,Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 26TH FEBRUARY, 2010 PER COURT 1] The Courts below has recorded concurrent finding of the court below. 2] The facts leading to this litigation are as under. The Appellant/ plaintiff came up with a case that, the suit land was purchased by his late father in the name of his elder brother Vijaykumar. 3 Second Appeal 485 of 04. It was, his father’s self-acquired property. He said he and his brother Vijaykumar had undivided equal shares in the land. He said he was cultivating the suit land since beginning for and on behalf of his brother and himself. He said in the year 1983 his brother died and the respondent No. 1 the brother of widow and the respondent No. 2 respondent No.1's father started obstructing his cultivation. In order to stop such obstruction, he filed this suit simplictor for injunction. On the other hand, the respondent No. 1 also filed similar suit. But her case was quiet different. She said her father-in-law purchased two pieces of properties one was a house at Aurangabad and the other was the suit land. She said the house was purchased in the name of the respondent/defendant, whereas the land was purchased in the name of her husband. [There is no dispute about the fact that both these properties were purchased by the father while the parties still young and minor.] The respondent No. 1 further stated that, her father-in-law purchased these properties in order to give these properties 4 Second Appeal 485 of 04. to the brothers independently and thereby effect partition in his life time. She said before her husband's death, her husband was cultivating the land, and thereafter she is cultivating the same exclusively. She clearly stated that, the appellant had no concern whatsoever with the land. The Trial Court recorded evidence and during that stage some what different facts have come on record. However, they were not really relevant and pertinent qua the pleadings the parties. Therefore, such admission etc. were not given any importance by the Courts below and the Courts below accepted the case of the respondent. 3] Having regard to the pleadings of the appellant case. I think there is no hope for the appellant in these appeals. There is no substantial law point arising in these appeals. Both the appeals therefore fail. Both the Second Appeals stand dismissed. Consequently the Civil Application No. 5103 of 2008 also stand dismissed. (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) SDM*/SA485.04/260210