1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 700 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1652 OF 2008 Sou. Muktabai M. Katkar........Appellant versus Sadashiv D. Katkar........ Respondent. Mr. R.S. Apte with Ashutosh Gole adv. for the Appellant CORAM: RANJIT V. MORE, J. DATED : 15th DECEMBER,2008. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Apte learned counsel for the appellant. The appellant is original defendant. The respondent/plaintiff's suit for specific performance of agreement of re-conveyance was decreed by the trial court which decree is confirmed by the lower appellate court. Both the lower courts below concluded that respondent/plaintiff has proved the agreement of re-convyance. The concurrent finding of fact is also recorded that respondent/plaintiff was and is ready and willing to perform her part of contract. After going through the impugned judgment and the deposition of the respondent 1-A Suman Katkar, I am of the view that correct approach is taken by the lower courts. The 2 appreciation of evidence cannot be said to be perverse. No question of law much less substantial question of law is involved in this second appeal. Second aappeal is accordingly dismissed. 7. In view of the dismissal of second appeal, civil application does not survive and the same is also dismissed. (R. V. More, J.)