1 S.A.No.629_2011 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 629 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Shri Mandar Limaye, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri S.S. Patwardhan, for the Respondent. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 24th November, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants. The Appellants are the original defendants and the Respondent is the original Plaintiff. Suit filed by the respondent against the predecessor of the appellant was dismissed by the trial Court. In Appeal preferred by the Respondent, the decree of the trial court has been set aside and a decree of partition has been passed. The appellate Court has held that both the parties have 1/2 share in the suit property. 2 S.A.No.629_2011 2. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants is that there is evidence on record in the form of a document of partition which wass effected in the year 1958. He submitted that the trial Court has referred to the consent letter executed by the Respondent which was unilaterally withdrawn. He submitted that this was a case of relinquishment of the share by the Respondent. He has submitted that all along name of the predecessor of the appellants appeared in revenue records for several years which was not challenged by the Respondent. 3. I have completely considered the submissions. The joint acquisition by the respondent and the original defendant who were brothers was not disputed. Reliance is placed on certain Letter of consent executed by the Respondent-plaintiff which was admittedly withdrawn by the respondent. Admittedly there is no registered deed of relinquishment executed by the Respondent. A 3 S.A.No.629_2011 reliance was placed on document in the form of memorandum of partition effected in year 1958. Even before the trial Court the said document was not exhibited. The observation made by the trial Court that it is a draft of the partition. The appellate Court has come to the conclusion that there was neither any partition nor any relinquishment by the Respondent. Therefore, the decree for partition has been passed. 4. In view of the findings of fact recorded on the basis of evidence on record no substantial question of law arises. Hence, Second Appeal is dismissed. Civil Application No.1504 of 2011 does not survive hence dismissed. [ A.S.OKA, J ]