1 S.A.No.446/09 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO.446 OF 2009. _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|_______________________________________ Mr.P.G.Mahalankar, advocate for the appellant. Mr.N.G.Kale, advocate for Respondent No. 1. CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 29.03.2011. 1. Heard. 2. This is plaintiff's Second Appeal. The plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery of possession against the present Respondents in respect of suit plot bearing No.15, situated in S.No.172. The trial Court dismissed the suit. The plaintiff preferred appeal. The appellate Court dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. Aggrieved thereby, the present appellant has filed the present Second Appeal. 3. Mr.Mahalankar, learned counsel for the 2 S.A.No.446/09 appellant strenuously contended that the Courts below have misread the evidence on record. The appellant had produced the Grampanchayat record to show that the suit plot was allotted to him and the present Respondents forcibly dispossessed the appellant and entered the suit house because of which the appellant had to shift at other place. The learned counsel submitted that lower appellate Court wrongly observed that the appellant is residing in a house allotted by the Grampanchayat. It was further contended that there is no record with the Respondents to show that the said plot was allotted to him. The defendants have falsely obtained Sanad which is challenged by the present appellant before the higher authority. This aspect has not been considered by the Courts below. 4. Per contra, Mr.Kale, learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 submitted that even the Sanad has been issued in favour of the present Respondent No.1. The defendant No.1 has also taken the electricity connection in house on the suit plot, so also the water connection. It shows 3 S.A.No.446/09 that the suit plot has been allotted to the present Respondents. 5. With the assistance of the learned counsels, I have gone through the judgments. The Courts below have observed that the plaintiff could not prove that the suit plot was allotted to him. There are no documents showing that the suit plot was allotted to the plaintiff by the Government. On the contrary, the defendants being in possession of the property would be presumed to be the owners, more particularly, as the Sanad is also issued in favour of the defendant No.1. The Courts on evaluating the evidence have come to the conclusion that the defendants have proved their title and the plaintiff could not prove his title. Even otherwise that defendants would have a better title in view of the documents on record. 6. The view taken by the Courts below is a plausible view. The Second Appeal being sans substantial question of law, is dismissed. 4 S.A.No.446/09 However, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.29.03.2011. asp/office/sa446.09