1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 361/2008 (Durgabai Babuji Pawar Vs. Prabhakar Tukaram Tayade) Appeal District : Application No. of 200 Writ petition Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. CORAM : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J. DATED : 12 th SEPTEMBER, 2008. Heard Shri Jaiswal for the appellant. The appellant is the original defendant. A suit was filed by the plaintiffs for possession of the suit property and mesne profits. It was the case of the plaintiffs that the plaintiffs were owners of the suit field and the defendants had illegally obtained the possession of the suit field in the year 1995- 1996. Though the plaintiffs asked the defendants to hand over the possession of the suit property to the plaintiffs, the defendant avoided to do so and hence the plaintiffs instituted the suit for possession and also for recovery of mesne profits. The defendant denied the claim of the plaintiff and further denied that the plaintiffs were the owners of the suit property. It was the case of the defendant that the defendant was the owner of the suit property having purchased the same from 2 one Diwakar in the year 1989 for a consideration of Rs. 29,000. The defendant claimed to be the owner of the suit property and, therefore, sought the dismissal of the suit. The trial Court held that the plaintiffs succeeded in proving that they were the owners of the suit property and the defendant illegally dispossessed the plaintiffs in the year 1995-1996. The trial Court held that the defendant had not succeeded in proving her title over the suit property. A decree for possession was, therefore, passed in favour of the plaintiffs and an enquiry for mesne profit was also directed against the defendant. The judgment passed by the trial Court was confirmed by the first appellate Court in an appeal filed by the defendant. I have perused both the judgments in detail. The findings recorded by both the Courts are pure findings of facts and are based on a proper appreciation of the material evidence on record. The findings do not give rise to any substantial question of law. The second appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE RMP