-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.960 OF 2006 APPEAL NO.960 OF 2006 APPEAL NO.960 OF 2006 Laxman Parsram Jadhav ...Appellant vs. Sushila Anjajee Sonawane & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.Suresh M. Sabrad for the Appellant CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : JULY 5, 2007. : JULY 5, 2007. : JULY 5, 2007. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard learned Advocate for the Appellant. The Appellant is the original Plaintiff. A suit for perpetual injunction filed by the Appellant has been dismissed by the trial court and the decree has been confirmed in Appeal. 2. After having heard the learned Advocate for the Appellant, I find that there are concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below on the issue of possession. The courts below after consideration of oral and documentary evidence on record have come to the conclusion that the appellant has failed to establish his possession on the date of institution of the suit. The Appellate Court has observed that except one pencil entry in the crop inspection column in favour of the Appellant, the revenue record does not support the Appellant. No substantial question of law arises. Second Appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. -2- JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE