mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 81 OF 2008 Balkrishna Bapu Sawant .. Petitioner versus Ranjana Shankar Sawant & ors. .. Respondents ... Mr.Umesh Mankapure for the petitioner. Mr.Shrishail Sakhare for respondents. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED : 25th August 2008 P.C.: 1. The argument of the appellant that on perusal of the map it is palpably clear that the partition suggested by the Commissioner is not equitable. The question whether the partition recommended by the Commissioner is equitable or not is a question of fact. Assuming that the appellant was to contend that finding on the said fact is manifestly wrong or apparent on the face of record. What is relevant to be noted is that the lower court has mentioned the fact that no suggestion from the appellant/defendant or any objection was raised before the Commissioner when the report was finalised so as to indicate how the recommendation of the Commissioner was unequal and inequitable. The lower court in any case has considered all relevant aspects of the matter and rejected the claim of the appellant. Not a case for entertaining Second Appeal in absence of any substantial question of law raised by the appellant. Hence, dismissed. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)