: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.446 OF 1990 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6525 OF 1999 Kedari Kondiba Salunkhe, Decd., Thru’ Baburao K. Salunkhe .. Appellant V/s. Tanubai Dattatraya @ Subhanji Salokhe, Decd., Thru’ Tukaram Dattu Salunkhe .. Respondent Mr. S.J. Ghogare for the Appellant. Mr. Sudhir Hardikar for the Respondent. CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED : 31 ST MARCH, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. The appellant has preferred the present Second Appeal against the Judgment and Order passed by the Additional District Judge, Kolhapur on 21st August, 1989 in Regular Civil Appeal No.298 of 1984. By this order, the Appeal filed by the defendant, i.e. the respondent herein, was allowed. The Judgment and Decree passed by the trial Court in favour of the plaintiff for possession of the suit propertY was dismissed. However, while passing the order, the Appellate Court observed that the defendant was : 2 : entitled to continue in possession of the suit property during her life time, as she was entitled for maintenance during her life time. 2. The facts in the present case are not in dispute and are not required to be set out for disposal of the present Second Appeal. The defendant has expired during the pendency of the Second Appeal and, therefore, the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Kolhapur has worked itself out. The Second Appeal has, therefore, become infructuous. 3. Mr. Hardikar appearing for the defendant submits that the appellant has filed another Suit, being Regular Civil Suit No.87 of 2000, for possession of agricultural lands, house property etc. against the defendant. That Suit was dismissed for several reasons, as detailed in the decision dated 17th January, 2006 of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kolhapur. It appears that an Appeal has been preferred by the present appellant which is pending before the Appellate Court. : 3 : 4. The Appellate Court shall decide the Appeal uninfluenced by any observations or findings recorded by the Appellate Court or by the trial Court in Regular Civil Appeal No.298 of 1985 and Regular Civil Suit No.943 of 1977. 5. The Second Appeal is, therefore, dismissed as infructuous. 6. In view of the above, Civil Application No.6525 of 1999 pending in the Second Appeal does not survive and the same is dismissed as infructuous.