HOUSHAKKA Vs. SHIVAPPA NAIKU MAHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants are appellants. The suit was laid for specific performance or reconveyance of the property under the terms of ex. P-1. The Courts below have concurrently found that Ex. P-1 is valid and properly executed and the plaintiff is entitled to a decree based on that. It was vehemently submitted before this Court by the Counsel for the appellants that the document is concocted and even one of the witness to Ex. P-l came to witness box and disowned his signature in the Agreement. But the Courts below have disbelieved such contention and concurrently found on fact that the document is valid and granted decree. Being decision based on concurrent findings, I do not want to interfere. No question of law is involved and the second appeal is dismissed.

(2.) BEFORE parting with, I would like to make an observation regarding the comment made by the First Appellate Judge Mr. N. B. Kulkarni on the members of the Bar. That is.

(3.) 1 am directing the Office to send a copy of the judgment to the concerned Judge, so that he can avoid such act of commenting on the Bar members in future. With this observation, the second appeal is dismissed.