^y Petitloner Reseond^lrts COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH: BILASPUR Writ Petition No. 3819 of 200S Mohd. Ismile, S/o. Late ShellGi Ahamad, aged about 35 years,. R/o. Baljnathpara, Raipur (CG). Versys 1) Municipal Corporation, Ralpur, through Commissioner, Municipai Corporation, Rajpur, Dist Raipur 2) State of C.G.through Secretary, Urban Deptt. & Admlnsstration, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur. (Writ Petltion under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India) SB: Hon'ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Preseiit: Shri Gautam Bhaduri, counsel for the petitioner. Shri H.B. Agrawai, Sr Advocate wlth Shri Pankaj Agrawa!, counse! for the respondepat No.1. Shri Ravindra Agrawai, Pane! La'vvyer for the State. ORAL (Passedon 12th February, 2008) Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that tne petstioner was aiiotted the dlsputed piot/shop on the basis of a iease deed executed on 31-12-197/0 without specifying the iease period on month to month basls. The petitioner cialms hIs right on the basis of the said lease deed to run his business on the said pioVshop. 2) Shri H.B. Agrawai, learned Sr. counsei appearing with Shri Pankaj Agrawai, oounseS for the respondent No.1 categonciiy states that since the iease has not been renewed, the petitloner cannot ciaim any ownership or titie over the shop in dispute. Learned counsel further submits that no steps. for demojtlon^dJspossession of tne petitloner from the shop in dispute, shaii be taken for tne statutory/ period as prescribed underSectJon 401 ofthe Chhattisgarh Municipai Corporatlon Act, 1956. 3) Be that as it may, since the disputed questions of facts are invoived, thte Coun in exercise of Its extraordinar/ jurisdiction undr Artlcie 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot resoive the dlsputed questions of facts. Raju '^•^ 4) Accordingiy, the petition is dismissed as not maintainabie. However, the petitloner is at liberty to take recourse to other aiternative forum, may be, Civii Court for appropriate rellef. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge