1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 646 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1630 OF 2010 IN SA No.646/2010 Shri Shamrao Dyandeo Patil, since deceased by his legal heirs 1.Shri Anandrao Shamrao Patil and ors .. Appellants. Vs. 1.Shri Krishna Hari Patil and ors .. Respondents. Mr.A.V.Anturkar i/b Mr S.B.Deshmukh, for the appellants. Mr R.A.Thorat i/b Bhushan Walimbe, for the respondents. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 26/11/2010. PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The appellants have challenged the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below in a suit filed by the respondents-plaintiffs. The suit instituted by the respondents- plaintiffs for recovery of possession is based on title. It appears that a sale deed in respect of the suit property was executed by defendant no.1 in favour of the plaintiffs on 21.12.1978 for Rs.500/-. Mr Anturkar, learned counsel for the appellants, at the outset, submitted that since there was no consideration paid by the plaintiffs in respect of the land, the decree of possession of the super-structure with land is wrong and illegal. In other words, he submitted that the land did not stand conveyed in favour of the plaintiffs by virtue of the sale deed dated T 2 21.12.178 since no consideration was paid by the plaintiffs to the defendants. It is true that in the written statement such contention was urged by the appellants. The appellants, however, did not either enter into witness box or lead any other evidence in support of this contention. That apart, the appellants did not raise this as a ground of appeal before the first appellate court. In view thereof, in my opinion, this ground cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time in the Second Appeal. Mr Anturkar did not urge any other contentions. No substantial question of law is either involved or raised in the Second Appeal. Hence, the Second Appeal is dismissed. The civil application is also disposed of. At this stage, Mr Anturkar prayed for time to the appellants to vacate the suit premises and hand over possession thereof to the respondents-plaintiffs. Mr Thorat, learned counsel for the respondents fairly submitted that some reasonable time may be granted as prayed for. In the circumstances, the appellants are allowed to hand over possession as per the impugned decree to the respondents within a period of four months from today on their filing usual undertaking in this court within a period of two weeks from today with an advance copy thereof to the advocate for the respondents. (D.B.Bhosale, J.) 3