IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 28TH MAGHA 1930 RSA.No. 496 of 2008 --------------------------------- AS.330/2006 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, N.PARAVUR OS.806/2003 of MUNSIFF COURT, N.PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF: ARUNDATHI, AGED 54, W/O.SASIDHARAN, KADATHUKADAVIL VALLUVALLY MURI, KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR SRI.P.VISWANATHAN SRI.AJU MATHEW RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: VARGHESE, AGED 62, S/O.JOSEPH, RAMACHAMKUZHIYIL, VALLUVALLY MURI, KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE. ADV.SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. Balachandran, J. -------------------------- R.S.A.No.496 of 2008 -------------------------- JUDGMENT Heard counsel on both sides. 2. I have perused the concurrent judgments of the courts below. I do not see any substantial question of law arising for consideration by this Court in this Regular Second Appeal, as both the courts below have considered the rival claims properly interpreting documents A1 and B1 and B2 as also Exhibit C1 commission report and Exhibit C1(a) plan. The learned counsel for the appellant could not make out that there exists any substantial question of law arising for consideration by this Court in this Regular Second Appeal. There is no merit in this Regular Second Appeal filed assailing the concurrent verdicts of the courts below. In the result, I dismiss this Regular Second Appeal. 17th February, 2009 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv