The Bench dismissed the second appeal, holding that the appealed order was based purely on appreciation of evidence and questions of fact, with no substantial legal question involved.
The appeal was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
SA 353 2013
vks
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE - CIVIL SECOND APPEAL NO.353 OF 2013. WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1008 OF 2013 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.353 OF 2013.
Ankush Daji Mohite and anr .. Appellants. V/s.
Abhimanyu Namdev Kokate and others .. Respondents.
Mr. Surel S. Shah, for the Appellants.
CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J.
DATE : 25th July, 2013
P.C.
concurrent findings of the learned Civil Judge
Junior Division, Mohol, District: Solapur maintained upon an appeal by the learned District judge, Solapur, who held that the appellants-plaintiffs failed to prove that the defendants had attempted to create a new cart
page 1 of 2
SA 353 2013
way through the western side of the suit land.
The substantial question of law which have been sought to be formulated are not at all questions of law. The suit and the appeal are decided by the learned Civil Judge and the learned District Judge by appreciating the evidence purely on question of fact. No substantial question of law is involved. The
Appeal is dismissed.
page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the substantial questions of law formulated in the second appeal have any legal merit.
Whether the concurrent findings of fact by the Civil Judge and District Judge should be interfered with.
Ankush Daji Mohite
Abhimanyu Namdev Kokate
R.C. Chavan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
