1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 405 OF 2008 (Baliram Chinga Ramteke vs. Smt. Hirkanya Jiwan Ramteke) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JANUARY 14, 2009. Heard Shri Pathak, learned counsel for the appellant. The challenge is to the concurrent judgments holding that the respondent (original plaintiff) did not execute any sale deed in favour of the appellant. The learned counsel invites attention to the questions framed at Sr. Nos. 1 to 5 in appeal memo as substantial questions of law involved. The consideration of Courts below show that execution of sale deed as required by law has not been established. Not only this, the Courts have found that the executant – present respondent was illiterate innocent lady and present respondent was in a position to dominate her. The provisions of Section 111 of the Evidence Act are, therefore, looked into and finding has been recorded against 2 the present appellant. In view of these findings which are not demonstrated to be perverse, no substantial question of law arises. Second Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.