1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 432 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1085 OF 2008 Dharma Dashrath Mane ........Appellant versus Kakasaheb Gulabrao Godase & ors......... Respondents. Mr. N.P. Deshpande for the Appellant CORAM: R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 06th OCTOBER, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Deshpande the learned counsel for the appellant. The appeal is filed by the original plaintiff. The appellant was the original owner of the suit land which is, Mahar Watan land. The appellant sold out the land to the respondent in the year 1973 without obtaining prior permission of the Collector. Thereafter Regular Civil Suit No.230/74 was filed by the respondent against the appellant as the appellant started disturbing the respondent' s possession. On 29/8/1974 consent decree was passed restraining the appellant from disturbing possession of the respondent in the suit property. 2 2. On 5th June 1989 the sale deed executed in favour of the respondent by the appellant , was declared null and void by the Revenue Authority for want of prior permission. Thereafter present suit was filed by the appellant/plaintiff for setting aside the consent terms in regular civil suit No.230/77 on the ground that the same was without jurisdiction. The courts below concurrently held that the appellant/plaintiff failed to point out any material and failed to show that RCS No. 230/74 was without jurisdiction. In any case, the present suit was filed by the appellant on 3-10-1991 for declaration that consent terms which were arrived on 29/7/1974 are without jurisdiction. Obviously the present suit is barred by limitation. The appellant himself transferred the suit land to the respondent by the registered sale deed and thereafter consent decree was passed in RCS No.230/94. Now the appellant cannot be allowed to take advantage of the subsequent order of Revenue authorities declaring the sale deed in question as null and void, for want of permission. I do not find any error in the finding arrived at by the lower court. No substantial question of law is involved in the said appeal. Second Appeal is accordingly dismissed. 3. In view of the dismissal of second appeal, civil application does not survive and the same is also dismissed. 3 ( R.V. MORE, J.)