1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 509 OF 2000 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6177 OF 2000. Faturaj Laxman Mumberkar & ors. : Appellants versus Smt.Krishnabai (Sitabai) Ramchandra Sarang since deceased by her heirs and legal representatives 1(a) Shri Sakharam Ramchandra Sarang and others. : Respondents. Shri. R.D. Sawant for the Appellants. Shri. A.S. Khandeparkar for the Respondents. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : September 19, 2008 P.C. 1. This Second Appeal take exception to the Judgment and Decree dated 6/7/2000 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sindhudurga-Oras in Regular Civil Appeal No.108 of 1997 by which the Judgment and Decree dated 7/11/1997 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Malvan came to be confirmed. 2 2. The Appellants are the heirs of the Original Defendant No.1 and the Original Defendant Nos.2 and 6 in the suit filed by the Plaintiff i.e Respondent No.1 herein for partition and possession of his half share in the suit land bearing old Survey No.723-A corresponding to new Survey No.10, Hissa No.1/13 admeasuring about 15 R and Grampanchayat House No.103 situated at Deobag, Tal.Malvan Dist.Sundhudurg. 3. The trial Court on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence which was on record held the Plaintiff entitled to half share in the suit land as well as in the suit house. 4. The Defendants i.e the Appellants herein carried the matter in appeal by filing Regular Civil Appeal No.108 of 1997. The Lower Appellate Court confirmed the decree passed by the trial Court but held that instead of ½ share, the Plaintiff would be entitled to 1/4th share in the suit land and in so far as suit house is concerned, the Lower Appellate Court held that the Plaintiff would only have a right of residence in her life time. 3 5. Both the Courts below have concurrently held in respect of the Plaintiff's entitlement to a share in the suit property but have differed only as regards the extent of the Plaintiff's share. Both the Courts below having concurrently recorded a finding of fact as regards the Plaintiff's entitlement, in my view, the challenge raised in the above Second Appeal does not involve any substantial question of law. The Second Appeal is accordingly dismissed. 6. In view of the dismissal of the Second Appeal, the Civil Application No.6177 of 2000 does not survive and the same is disposed of as such. [R.M.SAVANT, J]