IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.35 OF 2005 Ishwara Dada Salunkhe & Ors. .... Appellants vs. Smt. Sonabai Dada Salunkhe & Ors. .... Respondents Mr.N.R.Bubna, Advocate for Appellants. Mr.A.M.Kulkarni,Advocate for respondent no.2. Coram : Smt. R.P.SondurBaldota, J. Date : 10thJune 2009 PC :- 1. This Second Appeal is preferred to challenge correctness and legality of the judgment and decree dated 16th July 2004, passed by the learned 4th Adhoc Additional District Judge, Sangli in Regular Civil Appeal No.63 of 2000. By the said judgment and decree, the District Court set aside the judgment and decree dated 18th December 1999 passed by Civil Judge, Junior Division, Jath in Regular Civil Suit No.67 of 1982 and dismissed the suit. 2. The appellants who are the original plaintiffs filed the suit herein for a declaration that respondents no.1 to 3 have no right whatsoever to the estate of one Dada Salunkhe, father of the appellants and for a permanent injunction to restrain respondents no.1 to 3 from disturbing the appellants’ right to the estate of Dada. Respondents no.4 and 5 are the daughters of Dada and real sisters of the appellants. It is alleged in the plaint that respondent no. 1 who claims to be second wife of Dada was his mere concubine and respondents no.2 and 3 are their children. It is further alleged in the plaint that there was no proper marriage ceremony performed between respondent no.1 and Dada. 3. The common written statement of respondents no.1 to 3 and respondent no. 5 refutes the allegations that respondent no.1 was a mere concubine of deceased Dada and not his second wife. It is to be noted here that respondent no.5, the real sister of the appellants and daughter of Dada is the signatory to the written statement wherein it has been contended that respondent no.1 is the second wife of Dada and respondents no.2 and 3 are her children. Thus, as per the written statement, respondent no.1 is the step mother of the appellants and respondents no.4 and 5. 4. The trial Court accepted the claim of the appellants and decreed the suit. Therefore, the respondents preferred First Appeal being Regular Civil Appeal No.63 of 2000, which was decided by the impugned order. The District Judge considering the entire evidence on record including the evidence of residence and evidence of school leaving certificates brought by respondents before the Court held that respondent no.1 is the second wife of Dada and the marriage having taken place prior to the year 1947, is valid. With these findings, he dismissed the suit. 5. Mr.Bubna, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the inference drawn by the learned Appellate Court as regards second marriage of Dada with respondent no.1 has no basis. He submts that the Court ought not to have taken into consideration the school leaving certificates produced by the respondents to hold that Dada was the father of respondents no.2 and 3. Perusal of the pleadings and the evidence before the Court, supports the inference of fact drawn by the appellate Court. I see no reason to interfere with the same. In my opinion, there is also no questions of law arising for decision in the appeal. The questions that arise are of facts which in my opinion have been properly dealth with. In that circumstance, the Second Appeal is dismissed in limine. (Smt.R.P. SondurBaldota,J.)