HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL No.683 OF 2011 JUDGMENT: The suit O.S.No.93 of 2000 on the file of II Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, filed by the appellate/plaintiff against her own mother and brother seeking permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property of an extent of Ac.4.00 situated in Sy.Nos.1087, 1089-1 was dismissed by judgment and decree dated 23.08.2006 on the ground that the plaintiff failed to establish the existence of the property under Ex.A.1 agreement which was said to have been given by her own mother towards Pasupukunkuma, whereas the suit schedule property was found to have been gifted in favour of the 2nd defendant who is the son of the first defendant. The plaintiff also failed to prove the possession over the suit schedule property. Admittedly Ex.A.1 does not reveal any boundaries. In fact D.W.1 gifted Ex.B.1 property which is the suit schedule property retaining the remaining extent of land. The total extent of land is Ac.7.93 cents and out of which the suit schedule property was gifted vide Ex.B.1 in favour of the 2nd defendant. It is stated that the tax receipts filed by the plaintiff also are not clear on whose behalf the cist receipts have been paid. Admittedly, the property stands in the name of the defendants 1 and 2. As it was not established that the tax receipts were paid on behalf of the plaintiff and the plaintiff also admitted in her deposition that she does not know the boundaries of the property and she does not know whether she paid the cist to the property or not and she also does not know the pleas taken by her mother and does not know the contents of the plaint and who cultivated the land till the date of filing of the suit. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 23.08.2006 in O.S.No.93 of 2000, the plaintiff filed the appeal in A.S.No.78 of 2006 on the file Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District. The lower appellate court on reappreciation of the evidence on record dismissed the said appeal vide judgment and decree dated 11.3.2011 confirming the judgment and decree of the trial court. Aggrieved by the same, the present Second Appeal is filed. I have gone through the impugned judgment and the material available on record. In view of the concurrent findings of both the Courts below, I do not see any question of law, much less substantial questions of law that arises for consideration in this second appeal. Accordingly, the Second Appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. ___________________ V. ESWARAIAH,J. Date:11.11.2011 Gk. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH SECOND APPEAL No.683 OF 2011 Date:11.11.2011 Gk.