1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 842 OF 2008 Gangadhar Bhagaji Dokhe (deceased through LRs) Appellant Versus Eknath Tryambak Shinde & others Respondents Shri V.D. Hon, advocate for the appellant. Shri V.B.Dhage, Adevocate holding for Shri A.M. Gaikwad, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 to 3. CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 25th August, 2009. PER COURT : 1 This is an appeal by original defendant raising exception to the concurrent judgments recorded by the courts below. 2 Respondents / original plaintiffs presented Regular Civil Suit no. 224/1988 claiming recovery of encroached portion of land from the possession of the defendants. It is alleged that the plaintiffs and the defendants are the adjoining land holders. Defendant is alleged to have encroached upon some area of the agricultural land belonging to the 2 plaintiffs. Plaintiffs got their land measured through surveyor. Surveyor who had measured the land is also examined and said witness has deposed as regards the encroachment alleged to have been committed by defendants. Considering the evidence placed on record, trial court granted decree in favour of the plaintiffs. Judgment and decree passed by the trial court has been confirmed in Regular Civil Appeal no. 1/2000 presented by the defendant. 3 Perused the judgments recorded by both the courts below. Plaintiff has lead evidence of himself as well as the surveyor who measured the property. Plaintiff has also placed on record the maps in respect of measurement drawn by the surveyor. The surveyor has categorically deposed before the court that the defendant has committed encroachment over some portion of land belonging to the plaintiffs. Defendant wants to contend that there are other maps placed on record at exh. 117, 119 and 120 which show a different picture. Although the witness i.e. the surveyor was confronted with the maps drawn earlier, however, the surveyor who conducted the actual measurement has not been examined by the defendant, nor the defendant has admitted the maps at exh. 119 and 120. Considering the relevant evidence, trial court 3 granted decree in favour of the plaintiffs and the same has been confirmed by the first appellate court. Questions agitated in the appeal are essentially the matters in respect of appreciation of evidence. No substantial question of law arises for consideration in the appeal. Appeal therefore stands dismissed summarily. 4 In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* dyb/sa842.08.odt