THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED SECOND APPEAL NO.240 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: The appellant-defendant filed this appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 {“CPC” for brevity}, inter alia, seeking to assail the correctness of the judgment and decree dated 29.04.2010 in A.S.No.80 of 2010 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Guntur, which is filed against the judgment and decree dated 18.09.2009 in O.S.No.516 of 2008 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur. The facts, in brief, which are necessary for disposal of this appeal, are that O.S.No.516 of 2008 is filed for ejectment of the appellant-defendant from the plaint schedule property and for delivery of vacant possession to the respondent-plaintiff and for recovery of arrears of rents from 17.03.2008 to 30.04.2008 at Rs.4,600/- per month, for recovery of damages at Rs.300/- per day from 01.05.2008 to 31.05.2008 for illegal use and occupation of the plaint schedule property and for costs of the suit. The Court below, after consideration of the evidence and material available on record, decreed the suit in favour of the respondent-plaintiff and the appellant-defendant was directed to vacate the plaint schedule property and deliver its vacant possession to the respondent-plaintiff free from any obstructions within sixty {60} days and to pay the arrears and also the damages, as sought for. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant-defendant filed A.S.No.80 of 2010, which the lower appellate Court allowed partly by setting aside the judgment and decree with regard to the damages by way of mesne profits, pending the suit and subsequent to the date of decree till delivery of the possession is set aside and the respondent-plaintiff is at liberty to file a separate petition under Order XX Rule 12 CPC. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant-defendant filed the present Second Appeal. Having considered the submissions made and on perusal of the material available, especially in view of the concurrent finding with regard to the eviction of the tenant, I feel that there is no infirmity in the concurrent findings giving by both the Courts below. Hence, there is no question of law; much less a substantial question arises. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed. However, a period of three {3} months from today is granted to the appellant- defendant to vacate the suit schedule property. No costs. _____________________ (GHULAM MOHAMMED, J) 18th March 2011 Note: CC by one week B/O RRB