( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 361 OF 2009 Balkrishna s/o Laxman Shete APPELLANT VERSUS Manohar s/o Dagadu Thorat and others. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. Abhijit S. Joshi, advocate for the appellant. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 18th November, 2009] PER COURT : 1. Heard counsel. 2. This is plaintiff’s appeal against concurrent judgements rendered by the trial Court and the first Appellate Court. He filed suit (R.C.S. No. 98/1993) for perpetual injunction restraining defendant from making any construction which was likely to close his western side access to reach the public way. He failed to prove any customary or easementary right to have egress and ingress to the house property from western side of his house. The trial Court as well as the first Appellate ( 2 ) Court held that the plaintiff could not establish that in between his house property and the house property of the defendants, there is an open space which was being used for access to reach the western public way. These are the findings of fact. Both the Courts have evaluated the evidence of the parties and found that the proof regarding common open space or the plaintiff’s exclusive open space which could be used an access to reach the public road is not proved. These are not the questions which require reconsideration in the second appeal in as much as no substantial question of law is involved. Nor even a tinge of substantial question of law appears from the nature of the second appeal. Hence, the second appeal is dismissed. 3. In view of dismissal of the second appeal, the civil application No. 5461/2009 does not survive and hence, stands dismissed accordingly. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/sa361-09 ( 3 )