1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 15 OF 2009 (Bajirao Sayaji Dongre vs. Daulatrao Rajaram Patil & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JANUARY 19, 2009. Heard Shri Lambat, learned counsel for the appellant – original plaintiff. The plaintiff challenges the concurrent judgments by which his suit for specific performance has been dismissed. The Courts below have found that one Madhukar Pimpole, who was party to said agreement, was not joined party defendant and therefore, suit was bad for not joining necessary party. It was further noticed that as per said agreement, the sale was to be completed by 15.5.1991 and hence suit could have been filed by 14.5.1994. The suit filed on 11.3.2003 was, therefore, held to be time barred. It is also found that in plaint it was no where pleaded by the plaintiff that he was ready and willing to perform his part of contract. The findings are neither demonstrated to be erroneous nor perverse. No substantial question of law arises for adjudication in this Second Appeal. It is dismissed. JUDGE *GS.