(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. SECOND APPEAL NO. 1709 OF 2005 Vikas Dhondibhau Shelke, .. Appellant Age : 42 years, (Original added Occupation : Agriculture, defendant no.3) R/o. Bota, Taluka : Sangamner, District : Ahmednagar. versus 1. Bhau Revuji Lamkhade, Age : 25 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 2. Popat Revuji Lamkhade, Age : 25 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 3. Shivaji Revuji Lamkhade, Age : 40 years, Occupation : Education, All R/o. Bota, Taluka : Sangamner, District : Ahmednagar. 4. Janabai w/o. Revuji Lamkhade, since deceased, through her L.Rs. : 4A. Bhau Revuji Lamkhade, Age : 30 years, Occupation : Agriculture. (2) 4B. Popat Revuji Lamkhade, Age : 30 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 4C. Shivaji Revuji Lamkhade, Age : 40 years, Occupation : Education. All R/o. Bota, Taluka : Sangamner, District : Ahmednagar. 4D. Sau. Vithabai Haribhau Shelke (Died). 4E. Sau. Anjanabai Balabhau Jadhav, Age : 50 years, Occupation : Household and Agriculture, R/o. Botha, Taluka : Sangamner, District : Ahmednagar. 4F. Sau. Shantabai Bhau Dumbare, Age : 55 years, Occupation : Household and Agriculture, R/o. Rajuri, Taluka : Junnar, District : Pune. 4G. Sau. Sakubai Murlidhar Dongare, Age : 45 years, Occupation : Household and Agriculture, R/o. Sakur Mandve, Taluka : Sangamner, District : Ahmednagar. (3) 4H. Janabai Nivrutti Auti, Age : 35 years, Occupation : Household and Agriculture, R/o. Rajuri, Taluka : Junnar, District : Pune. 5. Nivrutti Narayan Kale, Age : 40 years, .. Respondents Occupation : Agriculture, (Nos.1 to 4 - R/o. Bota, Original plaintiffs Taluka : Sangamner, & District : Ahmednagar. Nos.5 and 6 - Original defendants) 6. Janabai w/o. Narayan Kale (Deceased). ....................... Mr. L.V. Sangit, Advocate, holding for Mr. V.J. Dixit, Senior Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. S.K. Shinde, Advocate, for respondent nos. 1, 2, 3, 4A, 4B and 4C. Respondent no.4D dead as per court's order dated 17-6-2009. Respondent nos.4E, 4F and 4G served (Absent). Mr. V.S. Badakh, Advocate, for respondent no.4H (Absent). Mr. I.S. Thorat, Advocate, for respondent no.5. Respondent no.6 deceased. ........................ (4) CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 8TH APRIL 2010 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. L.V. Sangit, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, extensively. 2. The appellant herein is a purchaser of the property, during the pendency of the appeal, from original defendant no.2, Janabai. According to Mr. Sangit, the appellant, being a purchaser, is entitled to challenge ownership of the respondent - plaintiff in Regular Civil Appeal No. 39/2000 preferred by the original plaintiff. 3. The record provenly demonstrate, the predecessor in title of the appellant, Janabai, could not establish her possession based on any title or a possessory title or hostility to the original owner, plaintiff. The plaintiff indeed established that possession of Janabai was permissible. It could not be gathered that the action of the plaintiff seeking possession was barred by law of limitation. The action was provenly within the parameters of law of limitation. Since the appellant having stepped in the shoes of Janabai (defendant no.2) and as Janabai could not (5) establish her entitlement to retain possession, there is no scope for the appellant, the subsequent purchaser, in the Second Appeal to seek formulation of substantial question of law, which indeed does not exists. 4. The Second Appeal sans merit and it is accordingly dismissed. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/sa1709