1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Second Appeal No.900 of 2004 With Civil Appln. No. 5439 of 2004 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Shri R.R. Karpe, Advocate, for appellant. Shri V.S. Bedre, Advocate, for Respondents. 1. Appellant is original Defendant No.3, who is aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by 4th Additional District Judge Ahmednagar, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 310 of 1996 decided on 5.1.2001, whereby learned Judge has allowed the appeal and passed the decree of perpetual injunction restraining defendants from cutting trees on the boundary bandh between survey Nos. 8/1 and 8/2. 2 2. Learned counsel for the parties took me through the judgment of trial court, as also of first appellate court. Appellate court considered the evidence of cadestral surveyor which is discussed in para 16 of the judgment and it is found that the trees in question were in the property of the plaintiff and as such, defendants have no right to cut those trees. 3. After considering judgments of both the courts below, view taken by appellate court is found to be reasonable and cannot said to be perverse. No substantial question of law arises in this second appeal and hence the same is dismissed at admission stage. 4. In view of dismissal of appeal, C.A. No.5439 of 2004 does not survive. Date:16.06.2009 (P.R.BORKAR, J.) pnd/sa900.04 3