-1- GPN-J-2459-ARHCBN-3-04-1,00,000-ALA4* [Spl.-H.C.,A.S.,C.D.79e. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. SECOND APPEAL NO. 9/2009. Kewal Tulshiram Gajbhiye - versus- Sau. Ratnamala Manoj Ganvir ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or Directions Court's or Judge's Orders. And Registrar's Orders. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : JANUARY 27, 2009. Heard Advocate Shri Vywahare, with Advocate Shri Najbhile, for appellants/original defendants. He contends that survey no.30/1 is not in existence at all and hence decree for its partition is misconceived. It is admitted position that the appellants are subsequent purchasers of said survey number. In a suit for partition filed by the respondent no.1 along with other lands survey no.30/1 was also directed to be partitioned. The plaintiff was not satisfied with the said judgment and decree and hence she filed Regular Civil Appeal and in that appeal the Lower appellate Court has modified the judgment and decree of trial Court by including some other properties for partition. However, field -2- survey no.30/1 is retained. It is therefore, obvious that when judgment and decree delivered by the trial Court is not challenged, there cannot be any further challenge to Appellate Court judgment by the defendants. Similarly, the alleged non existence of survey no.30/1 cannot be a reason for interfering with the judgment and decree at this stage. No substantial question of law arise in this appeal. Second Appeal is thus dismissed. No cost. JUDGE Rgd.