1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Second Appeal No. 338/2008 Laxman Narayan Pote ..vs.. Sou. Gitabai Pandurang Ingole -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Charlewar, Advocate for appellant CORAM: B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 9 th JANUARY, 2009 The appeal is by original defendant. The suit filed by respondent for partition and separate possession has been concurrently decreed. Learned counsel challenges concurrent finding that field Gat no. 193 was ancestral field and remaining properties Gat no. 192 and 81 of Savali and Gat no. 5 of Ajitpur, in which the share has been given to the respondent was though purchased by him and were not his self acquired property. Perusal of the judgment delivered by trial Court as also by lower appellate Court shows that field Gat no. 193 was joint property in possession of the appellant. The present appellant contended that respondent had relinquished her share from field survey no. 193 but later on 2 accepted that the relinquishment deed was cancelled. The Court below has appreciated the evidence led by the parties and found that property has been acquired out of nucleus of Gat no. 193. It is to be noticed that once nucleus is established, burden was upon the present appellant to establish that the properties were purchased from his own earnings by him independently, which he could not discharge. The findings recorded by both the Courts below are not perverse. No substantial question of law arises for consideration. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE kahale