1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Second Appeal NO. 467/2010 (Sk. Hasan Sk. Chand (dead) thr. Hirabee wd/o Sk. Hasan & others VERSUS Sk. Gulab Sk. Kasam) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri A.J. Thakkar, counsel for the appellants. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 23 , 2010 . Heard. The appellants are the legal heirs of the original defendant. A suit was filed by the plaintiff for correction of entry in regard to the suit property in the sale-deed and also for possession of the suit property. According to the plaintiff, the defendant was the owner of field survey no.332/2 and he had agreed to sell the suit property bearing field survey no.332/2 to the plaintiff. However, in the sale-deed dated 15.04.1986, mistakenly, the field property number was shown as survey no.332/1 in stead of 332/2. The plaintiff, therefore, filed a suit claiming a rectification in the sale-deed. The defendant denied the claim of the plaintiff and also denied that the suit property bearing field survey no.332/2 was sold to the plaintiff. According to the defendant, the document dated 15.04.1986 was a nominal document and the defendant had not received any consideration for the same. It was pleaded that the sale-deed was executed for correction of revenue record. The defendant sought for the dismissal of the suit. 2 The trial and the first appellate Court, on an appreciation of the evidence on record, held that it was proved by the plaintiff that it was mistakenly stated in the sale-deed dated 15.04.1986 by the parties that the defendant had sold field survey no.332/1 to the plaintiff. In deed, according to both the Courts, the defendant had sold field survey no.332/2 to the plaintiff by the sale-deed dated 15.04.1986 for a consideration of Rs.6,000/-. According to both the Courts, the defendant had received the consideration towards the sale of field survey no.332/2. In such circumstances, the Courts held that the plaintiff was entitled to the possession of the suit property and also a rectification of the entry in the sale-deed. The findings recorded by both the Courts are pure findings of facts based on a proper appreciation of the material evidence on record. They do not give rise to a substantial question of law. The second appeal fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE APTE