1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Second Appeal No.179 of 2009. Manoharlal S/o Devilal Daga. v Raju S/o Pralhad Thakre & others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri Anand Deshpande, Advocate for the appellant. Miss Pragati B. Yerlekar Advocate for R-1. Coram : A.H. Joshi, J. Dated : 22nd June, 2009. 1. The plaintiff who succeeded in the Trial Court. The decree has been modified in the first appellate Court. 2. The decree has been restricted to the interest of Pralhad who had executed the agreement of sale i.e. half of suit property. 3. Admittedly, Prabhakar the brother of Pralhad was not a signatory to the agreement. 4. At no point of time, the plaintiff had come with a case that the alienation was for legal necessity of Hindu undivided family, by Pralhad as karta thereof. On this sole ground, the plaintiff s entitlement would be to the extent of undivided share of the Vendor i.e. Pralhad, and the 2 decree to that effect has been granted. 5. The decree of the first appellate Court, modifying the decree of Trial Court, is not shown to have been vitiated due to illegality. 6. The substantial questions of law styled as such in the memo of appeal, therefore, do not arise in the case. 7. The appeal has no merit and is dismissed. JUDGE /Muley/