: 1 : sa.335.2011 vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.335 OF 2007 a/w CIVIL APPLICATION NO.665 OF 2007 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.335 OF 2007 Unus Kasam Hatwadkar & Ors. .. Appellants V/s. Ismail Mahamad Hatwadkar & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.S.M. Kazi for the Appellants Mr.N.N. Gavankar I/b Arfan Sait for the Respondent Nos.1A to 1F, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DECEMBER 9, 2011 P.C.: 1. The appellants who were the original plaintiffs before the trial Court have approached this Court against the judgment and order in Regular Civil Suit No.91 of 1988 passed by the Civil Judge Junior Division, Ratnagiri and of the District Court in Civil Appeal No.102 of 1996. The principal contention of the appellants was that they were owners of the suit property and that they had a right to the property in view of the mutation entries and the 7/12 extract bearing the name of the plaintiff. The appellants are his legal heirs. The trial Court and the : 2 : sa.335.2011 appellate Court have rightly observed that mutation entries and 7/12 extracts cannot confer title on a person nor can they be treated as evidence of ownership. It is trite that mutation entries are made for the purpose of fiscal records and, therefore, they would not by themselves create any ownership right in the suit property in favour of the plaintiff. 2. In my view, the concurrent finding of facts recorded by both the Courts below need not be disturbed in the Second Appeal. 3. Second Appeal is therefore dismissed. 4. In view of the above, Civil application No.665 of 2007 does not survive and the same is disposed off accordingly. (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.)