-1- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND SECOND SECOND APPEAL NO.909 OF 2007 APPEAL NO.909 OF 2007 APPEAL NO.909 OF 2007 Anuradha Nitin Talekar & Ors. ...Appellants vs. Nitin Vishnu Talekar & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Sandesh Patil for the Appellants CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA, J. A.S.OKA, J. A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : FEBRUARY 28, 2008 : FEBRUARY 28, 2008 : FEBRUARY 28, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard learned Advocate for the Appellants. The Appellants are the original plaintiffs. The suit for declaration and injunction filed by the Appellants has been dismissed by the trial court. The contention of the Appellants-plaintiffs was that the sale deed dated 29th May 1986 executed by the first Respondent (husband of the first Appellant) in favour of the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 was null and void. The trial court found that the Respondent nos.2 to 4 have established that the sale deed was executed for a legal necessity. Therefore, the suit was dismissed.The Appellate Court has confirmed the decree passed by the trial court. 2. After having heard the submissions of the learned Advocate for the Appellants, I find no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below. No substantial question of law arises. Second Appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. -2- JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE