1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 541/2005 (Kalabai Rameshwar Thakur Vs. Tejrao Sitaram Jeughale) Appeal District : Application No. of 200 Writ petition Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. CORAM : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J. DATED : 16 th JUNE, 2008. Heard Shri Joshi for the appellant, and Shri Sadavarte for the respondent-sole. The appellant is the original defendant. A suit was filed by the plaintiff/respondent on a plea that he was the owner of Gat No. 434 admeasuring 1 hectare 42 R. The plaintiff got his land measured from a Government Surveyor and found that the defendant was in possession of 1 acre 13 gunthas of land belonging to the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed to have purchased the land admeasuring 1 hectare 42 R. for a consideration of Rs. 8,000/- in the year 1983. According to the plaintiff, since the defendant had encroached upon his land just prior to the institution of the suit, a suit was filed for possession of the same. The defendant denied the claim of the plaintiff and pleaded that she was the owner of 5 2 acres 20 gunthas of land in Gat No. 433 and she is in possession of the land purchased by her and had not encroached upon the land belonging to the plaintiff. Both the Courts, on a proper appreciation of the material evidence on record, concurrently, held that the plaintiff had succeeded in proving that he was the owner of 1 hectare 42 R. of agricultural land from Gat No. 434 and the defendant had encroached upon 1 acre 13 gunthas of land belonging to the plaintiff. While recording the aforesaid finding, both the Courts considered oral as well as documentary evidence on record. The findings recorded by both the Courts are pure finding of facts which do not give rise to any substantial question of law. Second appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE RMP