Honble YADAV, J. – Heared learned counsel for the appellant. (2). Perused the judgments given by both the courts-below decreeing the suit for declaration and permanent injunction. (3). The instant second appeal is concluded by concurrent finding of fact. No substantial question of law is involved, therefore, it is liable to be dismissed summarily at admission stage. (4). It is urged by the learned counsel for the appellants Mr. M.R. Singhvi that the learned trial court has decreed the suit but has not awarded any damages to the plaintiff-respondent as no relief was claimed by her. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that it is surprising to note that when an appeal was filed by the appellants then after dismissing the appeal, the plaintiff-respondent has been awarded Rs. 2,500/- as damages for which no relief was sought by the plaintiff-respondent. (5). It is strenuously urged by the learned counsel for the appellants that the learned first appellate court has no jurisdiction to make out a third case in favour of the plaintiff respondent in awarding damages to her. (6). Learned counsel Mr. B.K. Vyas appearing on behalf of the plaintiff-respondent conceded before me that it is true that the plaintiff-respondent had not claimed any relief for damages. He has no objection if the decree in respect of awarding the damages to the plaintiff-respondent by the defendant- appellants is modified. (7). I am of the view that the learned first appellate court has no jurisdiction to make out a new case in favour of the plaintiff-respondent in awarding damages for which no relief was sought by her, therefore, the decree to the extent of awarding damages to the plaintiff-respondent is hereby modified. (8). With the aforesaid modification the decree passed by both the courts-below is hereby affirmed and instant second appeal is dismissed summarily at admission stage.