1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 371 OF 2006 Balkrishna Ganpat Pujare........Appellant versus Balaji Ganpat Pujare & ors........ Respondents. Mr. S.D. Thokade adv. for the Appellant None for the respondents CORAM: A. P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 24th MARCH, 2009. P.C.: 1. The present appellant is the original plaintiff who instituted a suit for injunction simplicitor against the defendants who are appellant's real brothers. The appellant claimes that the agricultural lands which are subject matter of suit are purchased by him under section 32-M of the Bombay Tenancy Act, hence the defendants have no right, title or interest therein. Per contra the defendant's claim that the suit lands are joint family properties and hence there cannot be an injunction granted against the co- owners. Both the courts below, on appreciation of evidence and having regard to the fact that the plaintiffs had filed a suit for partition in the year 1992, concluded that the suit properties are acquired prior to the filing of the suit for partition by the present appellant, and hence the properties were joint family properties 2 and not self acquired properties even though the sale certificate issued under section 32-M is in favour of the present appellant. It is held that the present appellant being the eldest brother was acting as Kartha and had obtained the suit property for and on behalf of the members of the joint family. 2. Perused the judgment under challenge. On appreciation of evidence led by the parties on record sustainable finding has been recorded by the courts below that the suit property is a joint family property though standing in the name of the present appellant alone, for the reason that the appellant being the eldest was Kartha of the family, no interference with the impugned judgement is called for. In the result the appeal is summarily dismissed. (A. P. DESHPANDE, J.)