HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Sinale Bench : Hon'ble Shri Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. ABBellant Appellant (in First Appeal) Defendant No.1 Respondents Respondents (in First Appeal) Plaintiffs Respondent Respondent Respondent Second Appeal No.425 of 2008 Ram Kumar, S/o Bheer Das Satnami, aged about 36 years, occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Baihar Sari, Tahsil Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) versus 1. Sahodari Bai, W/o Pardeshi Lal Satnami, aged about 34 years, R/o Village Agrikala, presently at Village Kodera, Tahsil Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) 2. Shravan Kumar, S/o Phatte Lal Satnami, aged 26 years, occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Singhanpuri, Tahsil Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) 3. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) Second Appeal under Section 100 ofthe Code ofCivil Procedure Present: Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, counsel for the appellant. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this 11th day of February,2009) Heardon admission. (2) The appellant/defendant is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 07-11-2008 passed by the District Judge, Kabirdham (Kawardha) in Civil Appeal No.SO-A/2008 affirming the judgment and decree dated 19-03-2008 passed in Civil Suit No.75-A/2006 by the IInd Civil Judge Class-1, Kawardha, whereby the suit was decreed in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs. , (3) The concurrent finding recorded by both the Courts below that execution of Will in accordance with law by Jethu in favour of the •2-'- appellant/defendant on 31-07-1996 is not proved is based on proper appreciation of evidence, oral as well as documentary, and is a well reasoned finding. In my considered opinion, no substantial question of law arises for determination of this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. I.A.No.1 for grant of stay also stands dismissed. — Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge •l,"^^^-- Gopal n' g