1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.579 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1503 OF 2010 Dinkar Bhau Phulari .. Appellant. Vs. Prakash Balaso Khandekar & Sons. .. Respondents. Mr.N.J.Patil for the appellant. Mr.Surel Shah for respondent nos.1 to 3. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 16/11/2010. PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.7.2010 passed by the District Judge-I, Ichalkaranji, District Kolhapur by which the appeal filed by the respondent-plaintiffs has been allowed and the appellant- defendant has been restrained from constructing any structure in the suit property shown by letters A, B, C and D in the plaint or from doing any act, thereby causing obstruction to the free passage. 3. Mr.Patil, learned counsel for the appellant at the outset invited my attention to certain observations made by the appellate court so also by the trial Court and submitted that the S 2 respondent-plaintiff approached the court with specific case that the portion on which the appellant-defendant intends to make construction is a public road, which fact, the respondent- plaintiff, has not proved and discharged the burden. He submitted that the suit property which, according to the respondent-plaintiff, is public road is a narrow strip of land which is owned by private individuals in the village and the Gram Panchayat has nothing to do with the same. He further submitted that the width of the strip is not sufficient enough to hold that it is a public road. In my opinion, there is no substance in the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellant. I have perused the judgment of the appellate court and more particularly paragraph 12 to 17 thereof. For the reasons recorded in the said paragraphs it is clear that the strip of land on which the appellant-defendant intends to construct latrine is used by the villagers and more particularly the owners of the land abutting the lane as access to the public road. In my opinion, there is no substantial question of law is either involved or raised in the appeal. Hence the second appeal is dismissed. Consequently, the civil application is also disposed of. (D.B.Bhosale, J.)