1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 129 OF 2006 Gulabrao S/o Manikrao Mutkule Appellant Versus Ganesh s/o Manikrao Mutkule (deceased through LRs) & others Respondents Shri S.J.Salunke, advocate for the appellant. CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 27th August, 2009. PER COURT : 1 Plaintiff is raising exception to the judgments recorded by the courts below. 2 Plaintiff presented suit bearing Regular Civil Suit no. 246/1999 claiming decree of injunction against his brother and other defendants restraining them from alienating the lands bearing gat no. 35 and gat no. 128 situate at village Nandapur, Tq. & Dist. Parbhani. Trial court after considering the evidence came to the conclusion that the plaintiff has failed to establish that the suit property belongs to the family of plaintiff 2 and defendant no. 1 and as such it is a joint family property. Trial court has recorded finding that there was separation of shares amongst the brothers and as such plaintiff has no entitlement to seek restrain order against his brother. Judgment and decree passed by the trial court was subjected to appeal at the instance of appellant in Regular Civil Appeal no. 191/2001 which came to be heard and disposed of by the 3 rd Adhoc Additional District Judge, Parbhani who was pleased to dismiss the same by judgment and order dt. 16/9/2005. 3 I have perused the judgments recorded by both the courts below. Witness for plaintiff has admitted that there was partition between the brothers in respect of land survey no. 35. Nothing has been placed on record to reach conclusion that thee was re-union thereafter. In this view of the matter, the courts below were justified in holding against the plaintiff. No substantial question of law arises for consideration in the appeal. Appeal therefore stands dismissed summarily. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* dyb/sa129.06.odt