IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA SECOND APPEAL NO. 2 OF 2010 PRAKASH DATTARAM SALGAONKAR & ANR ... Appellant Versus MADHUKAR MAYEKAR & 2 ORS. ... Respondent Mr. Anthony D' Silva,Advocate for the appellants. Coram:- A. P. LAVANDE, J. Date:- 11th October, 2010 P.C: Heard Mr. D'Silva learned counsel for the appellants. This second appeal challenges the judgment and decree dated 28/7/2009 passed by the District Judge-I,Panaji, in Regular Civil Appeal no.65/2008, by which the appeal preferred against the judgment and decree dated 27/11/2007 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division "B" Court in Regular Civil Suit No.99/2001/B has been dismissed. The appellants are the original plaintiffs who had filed the above suit agaisnt the defendants seeking reliefs of declaration, permanent and mandatory injunction on the ground that the defendants had illegally constructed the hut in the property belonging to the plaintiffs. Both the Courts have held against the plaintiffs. Perusal of the impugned judgments and decrees, more particularly that of lower Appellate Court discloses that the appellants have not identified the property initially purchased by the mother-in-law of the plaintiff in the year 1981 and which was gifted to him in the year 2001. Moreover, the encroachment alleged to have been made by the defendant has also not been identified by the plaintiff. This being the position, I am of the considered opinion that both the courts below cannot be said to have erred in dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiffs. In any case no substantial question of law is involved in the appeal. Hence the appeal is dismissed. A. P. LAVANDE, J. ap/-