1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 251 OF 2004 Jagannath Waman Govitrikar........Appellant versus Sharad Waman Govitrikar (since deceased his L.Rs. Smt. Shubhada Sharad Govitrikar and others. ......... Respondents. Mr. P.K.Dhakephalkar i/b J.S.Deo for the Appellants CORAM: R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 29th September, 2008. P.C.: 1. Leave to amend. Heard the learned senior counsel for the appellant. None appears for Respondents though served. 2. Admit. The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration: 1. Whether it was legal and proper on the part of the courts below that Small Causes Court had no jurisdiction to entertain Civil Suit No. 607/89 as the suit was filed against gratutuons license ? 2. Whether it is legal and proper on the part of the lower courts to hold that the respondent proved his title over the suit property without even entering the witness box ? 2 3. Whether it would have been legal and proper on the part of the lower courts to draw adverse inference against the respondent, as he never entered the witness box ? ( R.V. MORE, J.) 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 245 OF 2004 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 251 OF 2004 Jagannath Waman Govitrikar........Applicant versus Sharad Waman Govitrikar (since deceased his L.Rs. Smt. Shubhada Sharad Govitrikar and others. ......... Respondents. Mr. P.K.Dhakephalkar i/b J.S.Deo for the Appellants CORAM: R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 29th September, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Dhakephalkar for the applicant. None appears for respondent though served. In view of the admission of Second Appeal Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). C.A. Accordingly disposed of. (R.V. MORE, J.)