1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 581 OF 2005 Ganesh Namdeo Payghan & Anr. vs. Govinda Gayaddin Gupta & Ors. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. AUGUST 04, 2007. Heard Shri Kurekar, learned counsel for the appellants – original plaintiffs. The suit filed was for partition and separate possession and for setting aside sale deed executed by deceased Namdeo on the ground that said Namdeo had no right to execute such sale deed. Shri Kurekar, learned counsel for the appellants argues that there was no legal necessity and he contends that it has been proved on record that Namdeo was addicted to liquor and as such to quench his thrust, he has executed the sale deed. He further contends that provisions of Section 16 of Hindu Marriage Act, have not been properly appreciated and it has been dismissed observing that present 2 appellants/ plaintiffs are illegitimate sons of Namdeo. I have perused both the judgments. It is apparent that a finding that Namdeo was not drunkard or was not addicted to drink has already been arrived at by both the Courts below and the said finding has not been demonstrated to be perverse. Similarly, it has been concurrently recorded that sale was for legal necessity. This finding is again a finding of fact and it has not been demonstrated to be invalid. In these circumstances, the contention that the suit has been dismissed observing that the present appellants are illegitimate sons of Namdeo has got no relevance as regards present Second Appeal is concerned. I, therefore, find that no substantial question of law arises in this Second Appeal. The same is dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.