1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 354 OF 2008 (Abdul Rashid Abdul Rasul vs. Abdul Gaffar Shaikh Munir & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JANUARY 12, 2009. Heard. The present appellant filed suit for permanent injunction and for declaration vide Regular Civil Suit No. 152 of 1994. The respondents filed Regular Civil Suit No. 115 of 1994 for recovery of possession on the basis of title. He contended that on 31.5.1979, father of present appellant sold the property to him and after purchase, he permitted the father of appellant to continue in possession for some time. Both suits were tried together by 5th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Wardha, and suit filed by the respondents came to be decreed and he was held entitled to recover possession. The suit filed by present appellant was dismissed. The appellant then filed two Regular Civil Appeals i.e. 77 of 2001 and 78 of 2001 and both have been dismissed by the Ad hoc District Judge – 1, Wardha on 13.8.2007. The learned counsel for the appellant 2 has contended that the sale deed Exh. 57 was sham and bogus document and was not binding on the appellant. It is further contended that in any case suit for recovery of possession on the basis of 1979 document in the year 1994 was time barred. Both the Courts have found that execution of sale deed by father of present appellant on 31.5.1979 i.e. Exh. 57 was not denied. The concurrent finding is not demonstrated to be either erroneous or perverse. The case of respondents was that after purchase, the father of present appellant was permitted to stay in suit property and when he did not vacate upon request, a notice was issued to him and after termination of his licence, the suit was filed. It is to be noticed that plea of limitation was not raised before the trial Court. In the circumstances, the question of limitation does not arise at all in the matter. Second Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE *GS.