1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO.1613 OF 2004. _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|_______________________________________ CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 08.03.2011. 1. Heard. 2. This is plaintiffs' Second Appeal. The plaintiffs had filed a suit for cancellation of the sale deed. The said suit came to be decreed to the extent of the share of the plaintiffs. The defendants have also filed the suit which came to be dismissed. The defendants also preferred an appeal. The appellate Court allowed the appeal filed by the present defendants, holding that the sale was for legal necessity. The plaintiffs have not assailed the said judgment. 3. Mr.M.D. Joshi, learned counsel for the appellants contends that it was erroneous on the part of the lower appellate Court to come to the 2 conclusion that the sale deed was for legal necessity in absence of the proof of the same. According to the learned counsel, the trial Court on appreciation of evidence had come to the just conclusion. 4. As the appeal filed by the defendants in respect of suit was allowed and the same was not assailed by the present appellants, the said judgment and decree is not binding on the present appellants. In light of the same, there can not be two contrary decrees. Even otherwise, the lower appellate Court on appreciation of evidence has come to the conclusion that the sale deed was executed by the Karta for legal necessity as it has come in evidence that son and wife of the defendant No.2 were ailing. 5. In light of the above conspectus, the Second Appeal being sans substantial question of law is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.8.3.2011 3