CSA 147/09 Ramjilal Vs. Chairman, Nagar Palika, Tijara, District Alwar and another (1) In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan At Jaipur Bench, Jaipur J U D G M E N T In S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.147/2009 Ramjilal Vs. Chairman, Nagar Palika, Tijara, District Alwar & another Date Of Judgment :: 24th August, 2009 P R E S E N T Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Ray Goyal Mr. Mahesh Gauttam on behalf of Mr. M.I. Khan, for appellant. ....... By the Court :- This is second appeal by the appellant-plaintiff under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the concurrent judgment and decree dated 18/12/2008 passed by Additional District Judge No.2, Kishangarh-Bas Camp Tijara, District Alwar in Civil Appeal No.17/2008 whereby the judgment and decree dated 18/9/2008 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Tijara was affirmed by which the suit of the plaintiff for permanent injunction was dismissed. 2. The controversy involved in the present matter in nut shell is that the appellant-plaintiff claims himself to be the owner of the disputed property on the ground that he had purchased the disputed property and he is in possession over the disputed property since last 20-25 years whereas according to CSA 147/09 Ramjilal Vs. Chairman, Nagar Palika, Tijara, District Alwar and another (2) the defendants the plaintiff is an encroacher on the government land and therefore the possession and construction of the plaintiff over the disputed land is illegal. 3. The trial court on the basis of the pleadings of the parties framed the issues and after recording the evidence and hearing the parties dismissed the suit of the plaintiff holding that however, the plaintiff is in possession over the disputed land but his possession is not legal as he never made any application before he competent authority of the defendants for regularization of disputed property and therefore the trial court found that the plaintiff is encroacher over the government land having illegal possession and therefore the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed. 4. Against the said judgment and decree the plaintiff-appellant filed an appeal in which the first appellate court while affirming the judgment and decree of the trial court dismissed the appeal of the plaintiff holding that plaintiff- appellant failed to prove himself to be the lawful owner over the disputed property. Hence, this second appeal by the appellant- plaintiff. 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the point of admission and perused the impugned judgments of the courts below. 6. It was inter alia contended that the appellant- plaintiff is the lawful owner over the disputed property and he is CSA 147/09 Ramjilal Vs. Chairman, Nagar Palika, Tijara, District Alwar and another (3) in peaceful possession over the disputed property since last 20- 25 years and the defendants have no right to dispossess the plaintiff from the disputed property and demolish the construction raised by him. It was also contended that both the courts below did not consider the evidence and material in right perspective. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made at the bar. It is not disputed that the plaintiff remained in possession of the disputed property for last some years but he failed to produce any documentary evidence in support of his possession and lawful ownership. Both the courts below after proper consideration of the evidence and the material arrived at concurrent finding that the plaintiff is an encroacher on the government land, in which I do not find any illegality or impropriety. No substantial question of law arises in this second appeal. Therefore, this appeal is liable to be dismissed at the admission stage having no merit. 8. Consequently, this second appeal along with stay application is dismissed at the admission stage. (J.R. Goyal),J. VS Shekhawat/- Jr. P.A. D58