1 sa 568.04 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 568 OF 2004 1. Baburao S/o Jagannathappa Chounde .. Appellant Versus 1. Tukaram S/o Gopal Kasale and anr. .. Respondents Shri P. R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri S. S. Manale, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 2. served. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 30TH MARCH, 2011. PER COURT : . The plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery of possession of an area of 26 x 24 feet Plot No. 17/11 of CTS No. 1530 of Latur. The Trial Court dismissed the suit. The plaintiff preferred an appeal the Appellate Court also dismissed the appeal. The plaintiff has assailed the said judgments in the present second appeal. Shri Katneshwarkar, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Courts below have not taken into consideration the evidence on record. The maps have been filed on record which shows that 2 sa 568.04 towards the Southern side of the plot of the plaintiff Latur- Nanded road is situated. As such, the area of the plaintiff extends up to Latur-Nanded road. The defendant had encroached over his plot. As such, the plaintiff is entitled for possession. The learned counsel further submitted that even in map drawn by the City Survey Office, Latur Exhibit 73 and 75 shows the situation as contended by the plaintiff, but this aspect has not been taken into consideration by the Courts below. The Courts below have perversely appreciated the evidence. 2. Per contra Shri Manale, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 submits that even the plaintiff had earlier filed a suit bearing Special Civil Suit No. 71/1966 against the Latur Municipal Council. In the said suit he had shown a open space between his plot and Latur-Nanded road and precisely this open space is suit plot which the plaintiff has no right, title or interest to claim and in fact, Babhulgaon road is Southern boundary of his plot. This is evidenced from the record. 3. With the assistance of learned counsel, I have gone through the judgments. The plaintiff himself in earlier suit bearing Spl.C.S. No. 71/1966 has shown the location of the property and 3 sa 568.04 had specifically shown that in between the Nanded-Latur road and his plot there is triangular shape of open space. When the plaintiff on his own has shown this state of affair regarding the location of property. Now he cannot turn around and contend otherwise. The Courts have properly considered this aspect of the matter. The Courts in detail have scanned and evaluated the whole evidence and have come to the possible conclusion. 4. In the light of the above that the case is based on appreciation of evidence and the said evidence has been properly appreciated, no substantial question of law arises. The second appeal is dismissed being sans substantial question of appeal, however, with no order as to costs. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/March. 11