1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR. Second Appeal No. 66 of 2007 (Sindhubai w/o Tilak Billore Vs. Radheshyam s/o Sadashiv Nagpure & another) Appeal District : Application No. of 200 Writ petition - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's Orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. N.N. Motghare, Adv. for the appellant. Mr. N.S. Talmale, Adv. For R-1. CORAM : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J. DATE : 23 rd July, 2007. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The appellant is the original plaintiff. A suit was filed by the plaintiff for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from disturbing the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit land Gat No. 269 of Village Bela and for a decree for damages to the tune of Rs. 7,000/-. Both the Courts concurrently held that the plaintiff had failed to prove that she was in possession of the suit land and that the defendants had threatened to dispossess her from the suit property. In view of the aforesaid findings, the claim of the plaintiff for grant of permanent injunction was dismissed. The finding recorded by both the Courts on the question of possession, is a pure finding of fact 2 which does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Second appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE RMP