1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.576 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1467 OF 2010 Sitabai Sham Borse .. Appellant. Vs. Gayasuddin Hyder Lashkari (deceased) through LRs 1.Praveen G.Shaikh & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr.S.G.Deshmukh for the appellant. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 11/10/2010. PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this appeal the appellant has challenged the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below rejecting her application under Order 21 Rule 97 to 106 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Both the courts below after having considered the entire evidence on record have held that the appellant - obstructionist has not proved her right, title and interest in the suit property. I have perused the impugned judgments and more particularly paragraphs 5 to 8 in the judgment of the appellate court. In my opinion, both the courts below have considered the entire evidence on record in proper perspective and have rightly S 2 held that she has no right, title and interest in the suit property. No substantial question of law is either raised or involved in the second appeal. Hence the second appeal is dismissed. Consequently, the civil application is also disposed of. (D.B.Bhosale, J.)