IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 1027 OF 2006 Saheblal Imam Patil ...... ...... ...... Appellant V/s Imam Sayyad Patil & Ors. ... ........ ...... Respondents. Mr.Sagar Joshi h/f Mr.S.M.Oak, Adv. For the appellant. CORAM: RANJIT MORE, J. 13th OCTOBER, 2008. PC: Heard learned advocate for the appellant. The appellant is the original plaintiff. Suit was filed for partition and separate possession. The trial Court dismissed the same and the lower appellate court confirmed the decree passed by the trial Court. So far as the property at Karjal is concerned, the finding of facts are recorded by the lower courts below that the parties are separately in cultivation. The plaintiff was not entitled for partition in properties at Katral as the same are Patil-Imam Class 6 - B properties and the father of respondent No.1-defendant No.1 was 1 doing the work of Patilki. After demise of father the respondent No.1- defendant No.1 is doing the work of Patilki. In this view of the matter, in my opinion, the Courts below were right in holding that the plaintiff is not entitled to share in the property and consequently the relief prayed for. Hence second appeal is devoid of any merit and the same is dismissed. 13.10.08 (R.V. MORE, J.) 2