1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO.225 OF 2011 Nangilal s/o Charan Jadhao VERSUS Divakar Motiram Athwale & Anr. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's or Judge's orders Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders Mr.Anand Deshpande, Adv. for the appellant. CORAM : A.B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATE : 20.6. 2011 . Heard. Admittedly, the document of title relied upon by the plaintiff/appellant is an unregistered sale deed for Rs.10,000/- i.e. above Rs.100/-. It was not registered document. Therefore, no title could be conferred on the appellant/plaintiff. Further, the Courts below have found that plaintiff did not prove the factum of possession. It is the concurrent finding of fact. Mr. Deshpande, the learned counsel for the appellant, urges this court to examine the evidence of witnesses. According to him, the oral evidence of the witnesses clearly shows about the possession of the plaintiff. It is not possible to re-appreciate the evidence of the witnesses examined by the plaintiff to find out the position, particularly when the Courts below have concurrently held that the plaintiff was not in possession. Therefore, on both the counts it is not possible to interfere with the findings of fact. 2 Counsel for the appellant has argued that the respondents did not deny the ownership. Needless to say that it is for the plaintiff to prove his case rather than denial of the case by the defendants. There is no merits in the second appeal. It is dismissed with no costs. JUDGE Hirekhan