1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. M.C.A. NO. 359/08 IN SA. NO. 287/2000 Atmaram Ganpat Bilewar Vs. Anil Shivlal Sultane ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE, J. DATED : 2/5/2008 Heard Mr. S. S. Deshpande, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. B.S. Deshpande, learned counsel for the respondent. By this application, the applicant, who is original plaintiff in the suit filed against respondent-defendant seeks review of order dated 24.9.2004 passed by this Court summarily dismissing Second Appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated 4.9.2000 passed by the Additional District Judge, Khamgaon in Regular Civil Appeal No. 59/1999 dismissing the appeal filed by the present applicant against the judgment and decree dated 29/4/1995 passed by Joint Civil Judge, Jr. Dn. Khamgaon in Regular Civil Suit No. 221/1987. The applicant filed suit against respondent- defendant claiming easement right of way in respect of 2 Dhura existing between the property of the plaintiff bearing Survey NO.30 and property of defendant bearing survey no. 64. The trial Court as well as Appellate Court dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiff had not proved his case. Second Appeal preferred by the appellant was dismissed by this Court holding that no substantial question of law was involved in the matter. The present review application has been filed on the ground that after second appeal was dismissed the applicant obtained a copy of the map from the Deputy Inspector of Land Records which discloses that there is a way in between the property of the plaintiff and the defendant. Mr. S.S. Deshpande, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in spite of repeated demands, Patwari did not issue the said map to the applicant and, therefore, the said map was not produced before the trial Court as well as lower Appellate Court. According to Mr. Deshpande, the said map clearly proves the existence of way between the property of the plaintiff and the defendant and, therefore, the judgments passed by both the Courts below are quashed and set aside. Per contra, Mr. B.S.. Deshpande, learned counsel for the respondent-defendant submitted that both the Courts below have rightly dismissed the claim of the 3 applicant and this Court by order dated 24.9.2004 has dismissed Second Appeal No. 287/2000 preferred by the applicant on the ground that no substantial question of law was involved in the matter. According to the Mr. Deshpande, no case is made out for grant of review. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having perused the records, I find no merit in the present application. The applicant in the present application has made statement that in spite of repeated demands, Patwari did not issue said map to him. It is difficult to accept the said statement. In case a demand was made by the applicant for certified copy of the map, the Patwari was bound to issue the same and in case of wrongful refusal by Patwari, the applicant could have availed of appropriate remedy to get the certified copy of the map. The applicant having failed in both the Courts as well as in this Court cannot approach this Court to exercise review jurisdiction on the ground that after Second Appeal was dismissed on the ground no substantial question of law was involved, he has come in possession of document, which according to him, proves his case. It would not be proper to allow the applicant to re- open the issue which has attained finality that too after almost 20 years of filing of the suit. 4 For the reasons aforesaid, I find no merit in the application. Hence, the application is rejected. JUDGE Ambulkar