1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4757 OF 2009 Kashibai Shivram Kamat .. Petitioner. Vs. Mahadeo Vitthal Pednekar & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr.S.G.Karandikar for the petitioner. Coram: D.B. BHOSALE, J. Dated : 29TH AUGUST, 2009 P.C. . Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This petition is directed against the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the authorities below answering the reference made by the Civil Court vide order dated 13.6.1969 in the affirmative. By the order dated 13.6.1969 the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Vengurla, had made a reference under section 85-A of the B.T & A.L. Act of the issue whether “Do the plaintiffs prove that they are protected tenants in the suit land ?“. All the three authorities have concurrently held that original plaintiff nos.1 and 2 are the protected tenants in respect of two third share in the suit properties. Mr.Karandikar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that none of the authorities have recorded a findings that plaintiff nos.1 and 2 were in possession since prior to 1946. As a matter of fact, the challenge before the 2 authorities below was not on this ground. Such contention is urged for the first time in the petition. Considering that there are concurrent findings recorded by the authorities below and considering that there is sufficient material on record to sustain those findings and further considering extremely limited jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to disturb the findings of fact, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. Order accordingly. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)