GURAPPA Vs. SADASHIVRAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second Appeal arises out of the judgment and decree dated 15th September 2000 in R.A.No.69/1989 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Bidar, confirming the judgment and decree dated 30th January 1989 in O.S.No.182/1983 on the file of the Civil Judge, Bidar.

(2.) THE plaintiff ? first respondent herein claiming to be the absolute owner of Sy.No.134/A situate at Jalasingi village, Bidar District, Bidar, had filed a suit for declaration that he is the absolute owner of the said property and for perpetual injunction and that, the vendor of appellants 1 and 2 herein has no right, title or interest in respect of the land in question i.e. Sy.No.134/A measuring 10 acres 12 guntas, which had come to the share of deceased father of the plaintiff ? first respondent herein, namely Sri. Kishanrao. One Sri. Rangarao, who had no right, title or interest in respect of the land in question, is alleged to have sold the same in favour of the defendants. THE said suit filed by plaintiff ? first respondent had come up for consideration before the Trial Court on 30th January 1989 and the Trial Court after considering the pleadings of both parties, with reference to oral and documentary evidence, has framed necessary issues, Issue Nos.1 to 7 and one additional issue. After appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and other relevant material, the Trial Court has decreed the suit holding that, the first respondent ? plaintiff is entitled to receive the compensation awarded by the acquisition authority in respect of the land in Sy.No.134/A measuring 10 acres 12 guntas (Hissa No.1) situate at Jalasingi village, Humnabad taluk. Assailing the correctness of the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court as referred above, appellants 1 and 2 herein have filed the appeal in R.A.No.69/1989 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Bidar. THE appellate Court, after critical evaluation of the material available on record with reference to relevant documentary evidence and pleadings of the parties, has framed necessary points for consideration, Points 1 to 6 and answered point Nos.1 and 3 in the affirmative and answered point Nos.2, 4, 5 and 6 in the negative. THE Lower Appellate Court after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, including the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, by its order dated 15th September 2000 has dismissed the appeal holding that, the appellants herein have failed to establish that, the land in question belongs to the vendor and that, their purchase is in accordance with law. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and decree passed by both the Courts below, the appellants herein felt necessitated to present the instant second appeal.

(3.) IN view of the well settled principles of law, laid down by the Apex Court and this Court in host of judgments, if the Courts after appreciation and re appreciation of oral and documentary evidence and other relevant material available on file have recorded concurrent finding of fact, this Court cannot interfere in the said concurrent finding of fact, until and unless the parties redress their grievance and make out a case that there is substantial question of law involved in the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below.