1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 959 OF 2005 .Raghunath Mohana Kandalkar since deceased through Lr. Vishwanath Raghunath Kandalkar & ors.......Appellants versus Aba Raghu Dhangar since deceased through L.Rs. Bijalabai Aba Dhangar & ors........ Respondents. Mr. D.S. Sawant for the Appellants Mr. M.M. Sathaye for the respondents CORAM: RANJIT V. MORE, J. DATED : 24th NOVEMBER,2008. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Sawant learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sathaye for the respondent. 2. The appellant is the original Plaintiff. His suit for declaration that the sale deed dated 26-12-1980 executed by the defendant no.1 in favour of respondent no.2/defendant no.2 is null and void, came to be dismissed by the trial court. Though he challenged trial court's decree before the lower appellate court by filing ciivl appeal No. 96/99 same has also dismissed. Lower courts below concurrently held that the appellant/original plaintiff had no title to the suit property and infact suit land has allotted to the father of respondent no.1/defendant no.1 in consolidation 2 scheme. Consolidation scheme once finalised it becomes conclusive under section 24 of Bombay Prevenditon of Fragmentatioon and Consolidation of Holding Act, 1947. The validity of the consolidation scheme finalised long before, cannot be now allowed to be challenged. In my considered view, the lower courts below have correctly come to the conclusion that appellant/plaintiff cannot question the legality and correctness of the sale deed dated 26/12/1980 executed by responent no.1 in favour of the respondent no.2. No question of law much less substantial question of law is involved. Second appeal is dismissed. (R.V. More, J.)