1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 67 OF 2009 (Vijay Gulabrao Raijade & Anr. vs. Laxmibai Gangaram Madavi & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. FEBRUARY 25, 2009. Heard Shri Deshpande, learned counsel for the appellants – original defendants. The challenge is to the concurrent judgments and decrees by which suit of respondents – plaintiffs for removal of encroachment has been decreed. The learned counsel argues that the respondents – plaintiffs could not prove their title to suit plot and as the entire land belonged to government, in the absence of title, suit for removal of encroachment could not have been entertained. It is further contended that as the title has not been established, onus did not and cannot shift to present appellants. With the assistance of learned counsel I have perused both the judgments. It appears that government land was allotted to Magaswargiya Adiwasi Cooperative Housing Society and father of 2 the plaintiffs got Plot No.4 admeasuring 30' x 50' in that lay out. Plot No.3 was in occupation of present appellants/ defendants. The plaintiffs have proved by examining PW1 – Sitaram, Secretary of the Society and one measurer that there is encroachment to the extent of 11' x 30' on their plot. The finding reached concurrently is based upon appreciation of evidence. The defendants have not brought on record the area of their plot or then the allotment, if any, by society in their favour. In these circumstances, I find that no substantial question of law arises in this Second Appeal. It is dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.