1 SA802/10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 802 OF 2010 Damodhar s/o Gangaram Aghav, Aged 74 yrs, Occ. Nail, R/o Vyara, Tq. Vyara, Dist. Surat (Gujrat), C/o Wanji Bhika Kakad, Zanzani Temple, Subhash Nagar, Galli No. 1, House Hon 137, Dhule Appellant V E R S U S Pandurang s/o Budha Bagul, Age 74 yrs, Occ. Nail, R/o. Galli No. 6, Near Kondaji Vyamshala, Dhule Respondent Mr. M.K. Deshpande, Advocate for the appellant CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 14th June, 2011 ORAL ORDER : 1. This appeal is filed against the concurrent findings on fact that the appellant was trying to encroach on a 10 feet wide lane, which is situated on the north boundary of his plot. It is undisputed that this 10 feet wide lane runs east-west and lies between plot No. 212 (appellant’s plot) and plot No. 217 (respondent’s plot). The respondent’s plot lies on southern side of the land, whereas the appellant’s plot lies on northern side of the lane. The existence of such lane is an admitted fact. The respondent objected to such encroachment and sought to prevent such encroachment. The appellant pointed out that even the respondent had made encroachment on 10 feet wide lane from the southern side. The Courts below recorded finding that indeed respondent had made encroachment on the lane, but this would not permit the appellant to encroach on the lane from his side i. e. from northern side. 2. The finding of fact that the appellant had started construction of plinth 2 SA802/10 by encroaching on the lane has been concurrent and I do not find any reason to disturb the same. The appeal should therefore fail. The Second Appeal stands dismissed. ( A.V. NIRGUDE, J. ) SRM/sa/802/10/14/6/11