1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 657 OF 2009 1. Rangnath S/o Trimbak Sonawane and another .. .. Appellants Versus 1. Raghunath S/o Trimbak Sonawane and others .. .. Respondents Shri Bhushan Kulkarni, Advocate for the Appellants. Shri B. R. Warma, Advocate for the Respondents. CORAM : N. D. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 25TH NOVEMBER, 2009. ORAL ORDER : 01. Heard Shri Kulkarni learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Warma learned counsel for the respondents, who is opposing the admission. The appellants are the original plaintiffs who filed the suit for declaration and injunction i. e. Regular Civil Suit No. 12 of 1989 in the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division, Sillod. The dispute is about electric motor pump of 3 H. P. installed on the well to be used for irrigating their field which was partitioned. There is no dispute about other property in partition. The plaintiffs are two brothers on one side and defendants No. 1 and 2 are the two brothers on other side of the 2 dispute and they are supported by father defendant No. 3 Trimbak Sonawane. 02. The dispute is narrow to the extent of use of motor pump installed on the well situated in gat No. 11 of village Khamgaon, Tq. Sillod. The defendants story is that the old electric motor pump which was installed earlier and then in existence at the time of partition of their property. The same is replaced by new motor pump by them. As such, there is no cause of action for the plaintiffs to claim its use as per the alleged share 1/4 each and prayed for dismissal. The Appellate Court has rightly considered so and dismissed the plaintiffs suit by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. 03. Upon consideration of record and after hearing both the sides, I find no substantial question of law in the appeal. The appeal is devoid of merits and dismissed summarily at admission stage with no order as to costs considering the relations between the parties. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] bsb/Nov.09