1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. SECOND APPEAL No.553/07. Smt.Jaishree Janardhan Gedam .vs. Shri Ramaji Antu Gedam and 2 ors. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, office Memoranda of Coram Court's or Judge's appearances, Court's orders or directions order and Registrar's order. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= CORAM: C.L.PANGARKAR,J. DATE : 11th March, 2008. 1. Heard Mr.R.S.Charpe, Advocate for the appellant and Mr.Kapgate, Advocate for the respondents. 2. This is a second appeal filed by the plaintiff. 3. The appellant/plaintiff had instituted a suit along with her son against the parents of her deceased-husband, claiming 2/3rd share in the policies in respect of her deceased husband. The plaintiff alleged that as per custom in Gond community, she was entitled to 1/3rd share in the 2 property i.e. the polices left behind by her deceased husband. The trial court found that the plaintiff had failed to prove that there is a custom that widow succeeds to the estate of her deceased husband. The appellate court also concurred with the findings of the trial court. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the issues were wrongly framed by the trial court and therefore, prejudice has been caused to the plaintiff/appellant. Even though the issues may have been wrongly cast, the fact is that the plaintiff had led evidence bearing in mind her own pleadings that there is a custom that she was entitled to succeed to the estate of her deceased husband. The defendants had also pleaded a custom that the widow is not entitled to the estate left behind by her deceased husband. The courts below found that defendants had made out the case that widow is not entitled to the estate left behind by her deceased husband. Even though the issues were wrongly framed, it was observed by the court that the appellant/plaintiff has failed to prove the custom./ That does not make any difference because both the parties have pleaded the customs and defendants have established the custom pleaded by them. In view of the 3 concurrent findings, I do not see any substantial question of law involved in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed in limine. JUDGE. p z chute