ssm sm sm IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND SECOND SECOND APPEAL NO. 621 OF APPEAL NO. 621 OF APPEAL NO. 621 OF 2004 2004 2004 Babgonda Basgaonda Patil ...Appellant. Vs. Paragonda @ Pirgonda Sidgonda Patil ...Respondent. Ms.V.B.Naik with Ms.Deepa Ahuja i/by Mr.Vineet Naik for the Appellant. Mr.A.M.Kulkarni for Respondent 1A and 1B. CORAM CORAM CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J. DATED DATED DATED : 17th June, 2008 : 17th June, 2008 : 17th June, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. . This is a Second Appeal filed by the original defendant as both the Courts below after considering the material available on record, held that the plaintiff has proved the obstruction and has therefore, entitled for perpetual injunction as prayed read with possession of the property in question. The description of the same has been endorsed and confirmed by the concerned authority of the Revenue Department (D.I.L.R.). In the present matter when and under what circumstances the defendant encroached upon the land in question, is not material. The concerned officers of the Department after due measurement of the land in question in presence of the defendant himself measured the land and submitted the report ( 2 ) after completing the objection of the defendants. The contention about the pleading and or material in the present facts and circumstances of the case, in no way sufficient to interfere with the concurrent findings given by both the Courts. 2. The reasonings so given by the Courts below cannot be said to be perverse and or contrary to the record. The findings so taken by the Courts below, on the contrary, within the framework of law. The Second Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. (ANOOP (ANOOP (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) V. MOHTA, J.) V. MOHTA, J.)