1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.608 OF 2010 Kashiram Raghunath Sawant .. Appellant. Vs. Dattatraya S.Sawant & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr.S.S.Redekar for the appellant. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 8/12/2010. PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2. This appeal is directed against the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below finally dismissing the suit on merits instituted by the appellant for declaration and permanent injunction. I have perused the judgments of both the courts below. It appears that the suit has also been dismissed as barred by the provisions of Order 23 Rule 1. There is no dispute that for similar prayers the appellant had earlier filed one suit. In that suit, an application for withdrawal was filed and that application was rejected. The order rejecting the application for withdrawal of the suit was not carried further by the appellant. The earlier suit was thereafter dismissed for non prosecution vide order dated 2.5.1997 and on 3.5.1997 the present suit was filed. The S 2 court below considered the merits of the case also and finally dismissed the suit. Learned counsel for the appellant addressed the court only on the first point. In my opinion, the courts below have not committed any error of law in dismissing the present suit as barred by the provisions of Order 23 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure warranting interference by this court in the present appeal. Considering that there are concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below and that there is sufficient material on record to sustain those findings and considering that no substantial question of law is either raised or involved in this appeal, in my opinion, it deserves to be dismissed. Order accordingly. (D.B.Bhosale, J.)