1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO.495 OF 2008 with CIVIL APPLICATION NO.787 OF 2008. 1) Sulochana s/o Jagannath Walzade and Ors. - APPELLANTS VERSUS Bansilal Motilal Bhalgat - RESPONDENT ***** Mr.AR Rathod, Advocate for Appellants; Mr.RD Bhalerao, Advocate for Respondent. ----- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 8th April, 2010. PER COURT : 1) Heard. 2) The concurrent findings recorded against the defendant are subject of challenge in the present Second Appeal. 3) During the course of submission, Mr. Rathod informs, apart from the illegal activities of the respondent herein, balcony of the 2 respondent too protrudes in the property of the appellant, which amounts to infringement in his personal rights. If this is so, the appellant has certainly remedies available before the Competent Authorities under the Bombay Village Panchayats Act. It is for the concerned authorities to deal with the same on the representation of the appellants. However, the findings recorded by both the courts about the rights in the lane, cannot be said to be perverse requiring any interference. The finding of fact, as appreciated by the first Court, in conformity to the findings recorded by the leaned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Akola, does not warrant any interference. Second Appeal does not project any substantial question of law, it is dismissed with Civil Application. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/sa495.08