1 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.1144 OF 2007 Vasantrao Yashwantrao Dorge-Patil & Ors. .. Appellants V/s. Nandkumar Gulabrao Dabhade & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Rahul S.Kate for the Appellants. Mr.Sameer Singh i/b.Mr.Sachin S.Pande for Respondent Nos. 1a to 1d. CORAM: S.J.KATHAWALLA J. DATE : 9th NOVEMBER, 2009. P.C. This Appeal is filed by the Appellants impugning the order/decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Baramati dated 31st January, 2007 dismissing the suit which was filed by the Appellants against the Respondents interalia for a declaration that the Appellants being the legal heirs of late Smt. Sarubai, the suit property 2 cannot go in escheat to the Government and that the Plaintiffs are entitled to get the suit property as legal heirs of the late Smt. Sarubai and for setting aside the Judgment and decree passed in Special Civil Suit No.122 of 1989 as being illegal and improperly drawn and for direction to Defendant Nos.2 to 4 to allow/grant the suit property to the Appellants on payment of necessary charges. 2. According to the Appellants they are the children of the brother of the husband of the deceased Sarubai who expired on 30th June, 1984. The husband of Sarubai, ‘Vaman’ was therefore their uncle (Kaka) and Sarubai was their Aunt. Admittedly, Vaman the husband of Sarubai was allotted the suit land by the Government of Maharashtra as an Award for his meritorious service in the Army. After the death of Sarubai, the suit lands were transferred and reverted back to the Government on the ground that Sarubai has no legal heirs. However, the Respondents herein filed a suit being suit No.122 of 1989 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, at Baramati against the Government on the ground that 3 Sarubai has entered into an agreement of sale dated 27th November, 1983 and that they are entitled to the suit land. The said suit was decreed. Respondent No.1 herein consequently took out execution proceedings and obtained a sale deed dated 27th November, 2003 which was executed by the Court Commissioner. Since then Respondent No.1 is in possession of the suit land. 3. The Appellants herein filed a suit before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Baramati only in the year 2004. In the said suit as can be seen from the evidence led by the parties, no documentary evidence is produced by the Appellants to establish that they are the heirs of the deceased Sarubai i.e. the nephews of Vaman and Sarubai. It is submitted on behalf of the Appellants that though, it is true that the Appellants have not produced any documents to show that they are the nephews of deceased Sarubai and Vaman, Respondent No.1 herein in the cross examination of the Appellant have not challenged /disputed the family tree placed before the Trial Court by the Appellants. The said 4 submission needs to be forthwith rejected by this Court because the Respondents have during the cross-examination of the Appellants put their case viz., that the Appellants have no locus standi to file the suit, nor there exists any cause of action in favour of the Appellants. The Appellants have therefore as held by the Trial Court failed to prove that they are the legal heirs of deceased Sarubai. The Appellants have also failed to prove that the sale deed dated 27th November, 2003 is illegal and void ab inito or that the decree in Special Civil Suit No.122 of 1989 is illegal. Even today the Appellants are not in a position to produce a single document in support of their case that they are the heirs of deceased Sarubai. The Appellants are also not in a position to even explain as to why despite knowing that the deceased Sarubai has no heirs, they failed to take any steps pertaining to her property for a period of 20 years i.e. from the date of her demise on 30th June, 1984 untill the year 2004 when they filed a suit before the Trial Court. Under the circumstances the Appellants have failed to prove the basic requirement, in order to succeed in their suit, namely, that they are the heirs 5 of deceased Sarubai. The order of dismissal of the suit therefore cannot be faulted and the Appeal is hereby dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. 3. In view of the above order dismissing the First Appeal, the Civil Application No. 2008 of 2007 also stands disposed of. (S.J.KATHAWALLA J.)