1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR Second Appeal No.537/2010 Digamber s/o Gopalrao Endole Vs. Smt. Jijabai w/o Ananda Sanap and others. =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr. S. S. Singane, Adv. for the appellant. CORAM : R.M. SAVANT, J. DATED : 17/2/2011. The above Second Appeal takes exception to the judgment and decree dated 31st July, 2010 passed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 86/2000 by which the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court dated 17.4.1990 came to be confirmed. There is concurrent finding recorded by both the Courts below in a suit for partition and possession that the property in question was an ancestral property and, therefore, the vendors of the Appellant would not have executed the sale deed in question as regards the share of the plaintiffs. The Courts below have held that the defendants have not proved the legal necessity to sale the property in question. Both the Courts below though have held that the Appellant herein is a bonafide purchaser of the property in question. 2 The sale deed has been held to be valid only insofar as the share of the vendor Nandaji is concerned and not against the plaintiff and other family members. In the light of the above concurrent finding of fact recorded by both the Courts below, no substantial question of law arises in the Second Appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. In view of dismissal of the Second Appeal the Civil Application does not survive and is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Ambulkar