1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 86 OF 2010 _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of } Coram, appearances, Court's } Court's or Judge's orders orders or directions and } Registrar's orders } ______________________________________________________________ Ms. Varsha B. Khodse (Bhise), Advocate for appellant. ........................... CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 20/09/2010 PER COURT : 1. This is plaintiff’s Second Appeal. The plaintiff had filed Suit for permanent injunction restraining the present respondent/defendant from creating any cart track from his land G.No. 60. It is the case of the plaintiff that the cart track passes through G.No. 53 and not through his land G.No. 60. Both the Courts below on considering the evidence on record have held that the cart track passes through the lands G.No. 53 and 60. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the plaintiff has no where admitted that the cart 2 track passes through his land G.No. 60. Even the 7/12 extract states that there is road in G.No. 53. As such, this evidence was sufficient to establish that the cart track passes through land G.No. 53 and not through land G.No. 60. According to him, this material evidence has not been considered by the Courts below. 3. I have perused the Judgments. The Courts below have considered the evidence and have discussed the same. Even P.W. 2 – Talathi, who had brought the map along with him, has stated that the disputed way passes through G.Nos. 53 and 60 and the entry in the 7/12 extract about the road through G.No. 53 is not sanctioned. 4. In light of the concurrent finding of the fact, there is no substantial question of law involved. As such, the Second Appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. [ S.V.GANGAPURWALA ] JUDGE knp/SA 86.2010