(1) SA. 344.2000 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 344 OF 2000 Shaikh Umar Shaikh Sardar died through LRs. and others .. Appellants VERSUS Sayed Rahim Sayed Husen and ors. .. Respondents Mr. Sunil P. Deshmukh, Advocate for the appellants Mr. M.M. Patil Beedkar, Advocate for the respondent no.1 Mr. B.S. Kudale, Advocate for the respondent nos. 2,4,10,11 and 15 to 18. None present for respondent nos.3,5 7 to 9, 12 to 14 and 19 though served S.A. stands abated against respondent nos.6 and 20 as per Court's order ... CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 4TH MARCH, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1] This Second Appeal is filed against the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below that the appellants had no concern with the suit land survey no.162 of village Upali, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed. It was all along the case of the appellants that the suit land belonged to three (2) SA. 344.2000 brothers namely Dada, Nawaz and Khan Mohammed. On the other hand the respondent no.1 who happen to be the grand-son of Nawaz, contended that the land belonged exclusively to his grand-father Nawaz and the appellants/plaintiffs had no concern with it. . Before filing of the present suit, two rounds of litigation took place between the parties and their predecessors. In both the rounds, compromise was recorded. The Courts below interpreted the terms of the compromise and held that the land belonged to Nawaz. After his death it belonged to his widow and his daughter. It was further held that the predecessors of the appellants, tried to acquire the land by paying Rs.75/- per year as maintenance to the widow of Nawaz. Their attempt to do so failed because they did not admittedly pay the amount of maintenance to her. In the meantime, the property came back in control of the widow of Nawaz and she tried to sell the same in or around 1960. This time the legal representatives of Dada tried to stop the sale and again the parties recorded compromise. The terms of the compromise clearly indicated that even on at time, the widow of Nawaz, did not relinquish her right to the property in favour of the legal representatives of Dada. The Courts below held that even this compromise did not bestow title to the plaintiffs in that suit. . The Courts below concurrently held that the land never belonged to the other two brothers namely (3) SA. 344.2000 Dada and Khan Mohammed, the predecessors of the appellants and respondent no.2. 2] In view of this, there is hardly any substantial question of law arising in this Appeal. The Second Appeal stands dismissed. Sd/- (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) arp