1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.910 OF 2007 Raghunath Maya Patil (deceased) ..... Appellants thru’ LRs Smt.Girija Patil & Ors. vs. Shankar Raghu Koli ..... Respondent Mr.P.S. Dani, Advocate for appellants. Mr.A.G. Damle, Advocate for respondent. CORAM : SMT.R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J. DATED : 9th December, 2009. PC : 1. This Second Appeal is preferred against concurrent findings of facts as regards the encroachment by the respondent over the property of the appellants. The appellants are owners of the property at survey no. 80, Hissa no.1. They allege that the respondent while constructing his house has encroached upon their property to the extent of 35 ft. x 25 ft. The respondent denies that there is any encroachment made by him over the appellants’ property. According to him, his house stands on survey no.515. 2. The Courts below found that the evidence of the appellants and their witness is inconsistent to each other and arrived at conclusion that the appellants have failed to establish that there was any encroachment made by the respondent over the property of the 2 appellants. This concurrent findings of fact is supported by the evidence on record. Hence, the same cannot be interfered with. There is also no substantial questions of law arising for the consideration of this Court. Hence, the Second Appeal is dismissed. (Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota, J.)