1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 591 OF 2009 Prayagbai w/o Ambadas Dongare .. APPELLANT VERSUS Kesarbai w/o Baburao Buye & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. Chandole, Advocate holding for Mr. V.G. Sakolkar, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. H.V. Patil, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 to 4. ===== CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 25th FEBRUARY, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Mr. Chandole, learned counsel holding for Mr. V.G. Sakolkar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. H.V. Patil, learned counsel for the respondents. 2 Appellant / original plaintiff instituted suit bearing Regular Civil Suit no. 25/2002 claiming a decree of perpetual injunction as well as declaration of ownership against the defendants in respect of land survey no. 693 of village Dalimb, Tq. Omerga to the extent of 2 H and 69 R. Suit presented by the 2 plaintiff came to be dismissed by the trial court so also the appeal bearing Regular Civil Appeal no. 18/2007 raising challenge to the judgment and decree passed by the trial court has been turned down by the first appellate court. 3 It transpires on perusal of the judgment that there were previous litigations in respect of the suit property bearing Regular Civil Suit nos. 169/1983 and 112/1973. Decisions in the earlier suits are recorded against the interest of the plaintiff. Husband of the plaintiff was party to Regular Civil Suit no. 169/1983 which was presented by the sons of the plaintiff against the husband of defendant no. 1. Said suit was for declaration of ownership and perpetual injunction. Finding is recorded in the said litigation that the plaintiffs who were the sons of Prayagbai have failed to establish their ownership as well as possession in respect of the suit property. It is also recorded in the said suit that the husband of the appellant herein has alienated the suit property in favour of husband of defendant no. 1 / respondent herein on 10-8-1976 and since then interest is created in favour of the defendant in relation to the suit property. Taking into consideration the decisions rendered in earlier litigations, I am of the view that the trial court as well as the first appellate court have adopted correct approach in the 3 matter in dismissing the suit presented by the appellant / original plaintiff. No substantial question of law arises for consideration in the appeal. Appeal therefore stands dismissed summarily. 4 In view of dismissal of appeal, pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb/office/sa591.09.odt