1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.560 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1786 OF 2008 IN SA/560/2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders. Mr. Manoj Patil, for the appellant. Mr Atul A Kore for Mr Milind Deshmukh, for the respondents. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 30/11/2010 PC: Heard learned counsel for the parties. This appeal is directed against the concurrent findings of facts recorded by the courts below dismissing the suit filed by the appellant for specific performance of an agreement to sale dated 12.2.1976. The appellant also sought declaration that the possession receipt issued in favour of State of Maharashtra and Collector (Defendant nos 1 and 2) dated 23.3.1977 is null and voide and not binding on him. Further, he prayed for injunction restraining defendant no.3, original owner of the suit land, from T 2 obstructing his possession over the suit land. Both the courts below, after having considered the entire evidence on record, have concurrently held that possession was never handed over to the appellant, and I do not find any reason to interfere with this finding recorded by the courts below in the Second Appeal. After execution of the agreement for sale dated 12.2.1976 it appears that the land in dispute was acquired by the State Government and possession thereof was taken some time in March 1997 from defendant no.3. Admittedly no sale deed was ever executed by defendant no.3 in favour of the plaintiff and he never acquired title of the suit land. In view thereof and considering that the land was subsequently acquired by the State Government and the entire procedure of acquisition including payment of compensation has been complied with, in my opinion, the courts below have rightly dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. Considering that there are concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below and as I find 3 that there is sufficient material on record to sustain those findings, I am not inclined to admit the appeal. Moreover, in my opinion, no substantial question of law is either involved or raised in the appeal. Hence, the Second Appeal is dismissed. The civil application also stands disposed of. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)