HIGH COURT OFCHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR APPELLANT/: (Plaintiff) RESPONDENTS/: (Defendants) SecondADpeal No.190 of 2007 Santan Lal Satnami @ Banda, aged about 67 years, S/o Deendayal Satnami, General Power of Attorney Holder of Chhote Lal, S/o Manjhi Satnami, R/o/ Masanganj, Bilaspur, Tahsil & Distt.v Bilaspur (CG) Versus 1. TheCommissioner, Nagar Palik Nigam, Bilaspur (CG) 2. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Collector, Bilaspur (CG) 3. Rajendra Kumar Bajaj, S/o Daulat Ram Bajaj, R/o Juna Bilaspur, Tahsil & Distt. Bilaspur (CG) {Secondappeal under Section 100 ofthe Code ofCivil Procedure, 1908} Present: Miss Minu Banerjee, counsel forthe appellant. Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.2. Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P.Shgrma, J ORAL ORDER (16-7-2009) 1. This is second appeal against the judgment & decree dated 6-1-2007 passed by the 9th Additional District Judge, Bilaspur, in Civil Appeal No.2A/2006 affirming the judgment& decree dated 7-2-2004 passed by the 9th Civil Judge, Ciass-11, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No.lOOA/2001 whereby learned Civil Judge has dismissed the suit for declaration and possession filed by the present appellant. 2. According to the case of the appellant the appellant has purchased the land in question vide unregisteredsale deed in the year 1940 and was in possession, but subsequently he came to know in the year 1995 that the property has been purchased by one Rajendra Kumar Bajaj (respondent No.3 herein) and the same was acquired by respondents No.1 &2 for construction of bus stand and the bus stand was constructed intheyear 1976. After appreciating the evidence available on record, both the Couri:s below have dismissed the suit for declaration and injunction. Apart from the documentsof title and creation of title in favour of the %S§§III^^SS®iI%iB;SSSS8%SI%i appellant orrespondent No.3, it revealsthat the bus stand was constructed in the year 1976 and the present appellant. The present appellant is power of attorney holder of Chhote Lal, both are residents of Bilaspur. The appellant has filed the suit in the year 1995, after 19 years ofthe construction of bus stand. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, 1 do notfind any substantial question of law involved inthis appeal. 3. Consequently, the appeal is liable to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. Soma Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge ^mm ^^:-^