IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SA No.208 of 2004 BHAGWAN DAS Versus VIJAY SAO & ORS ----------- 08. 16.05.2008 Heard learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellant and learned counsel for defendant-respondent-respondent no.1. In a suit for declaration of title and other ancillary reliefs, both the learned courts below after considering the pleadings and evidences led by the parties and specific provisions of law applicable thereto arrived at the concurrent finding that Raghu and Mahabir were the sons of Banshi from his wife Chamelia, who after the death of Banshi married Chamari who was a stranger. It was also held that the said Chamari executed deed of sale on behalf of minors Raghu and Mahabir in favour of the plaintiff in the life time of their mother Chamelia who was their natural guardian and as such Chamari had no right and title to execute such a deed as he was neither the natural guardian, nor the defacto guardian, nor a guardian appointed by court and as such the said document relied upon by the plaintiff ( Ext.-6) is a void document. The said findings are the concurrent findings of fact by both the learned courts below and this court does not find any illegality in the same and also does not find any substantial question of law involved in the instant second appeal which is accordingly dismissed. sunil ( S.N.Hussain,J.)