1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.37 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders. Mr.A.S.Gadkari, for the appellant. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. DATE : 30/09/2010. PC: Heard learned counsel for the appellant. This Second Appeal is directed against the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below in a suit filed by the appellant for injunction simplicitor. The appellant claims right and possession in the suit property on the basis of the lease deed dated 28.9.1967 executed by Kashinath Chivate. The suit property was originally owned by Sagaji Kshirsagar who, according to the plaintiff, had executed a lease deed in favour of Kashinath Chivate and put him in possession thereof. In T 2 support of this contention, reliance is placed upon the sale deed dated 16.8.1967 executed by Sagaji Kshirsagar in favour of respondent no.1 wherein reference to the possession of the suit property of Kashinath Chivate is made. The plaintiff however has not examined Kashinath Chivate as his witness to show as to how Chivate could put him in possession in the face of the registered sale deed dated 16.8.1967 executed by Sagaji Kshirsagar in favour of respondent no.1. The right, title and interest in the suit property had already been transferred in favour of respondent no.1,i.e. much before the lease deed dated 28.9.1967 was executed in favour of the plaintiff. The courts below have taken this all so also the other evidence into consideration and appreciated the same in proper perspective. I find no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below. No substantial question of law is 3 either raised or involved in this appeal. The Second Appeal is dismissed. (D.B.BHOSALE,J.)