HIGHCOURTOECHHATnSGARHATBILASPUR »-y- SingleBench : Hon^bIeShri Dilic Raosaheb Oeshmukh, >3. AoDellant DsTendant Respondent Plaintiff S.A.NoSM/ZOOS Dwarika ; Prasad, S/o Bhuwala, , agect ^about '55.'yeais, ICaste ''Mahra,, .R/o ' Patgavan; Poljoe Station Pendra, Tahsil PendraRoad,DistrietBilaspur.(C.G.) , Versus • ! , •• .:, ,''; .:;; ~ '! , Marihar -Pfasad, S/o late. Nangi, aged about 50 years; Gaste ,Mahra, R/o Patgavan, POUce.'Statipn Pendra, Tahsil j Penclra'Road,DistricfBi]aspur(C.G.), . ' ABpea! linder Section IQO ofthe eode.of Civil Procedure. ;RreseFft;*:-...^:^..::'. ..•.:::. . , ;;'1 • .: - : :;::;. ' •- -:.: -. Shri.Qhirendra Mishra, counselfortheappellant. ; ; ' ORA1.0RDER (Passedonthis13u'd^ofAugyst,a308) Heard on admission. Tumane (2) ;• Jtie appellan lgfendant is- aggrievecl^by.tlie judgment^anc(^ieGre6 dated 22-04-2008 passeclby-the Additional District Judge, :(F.T.C.), Pendra Road in Civjl Appeal N0.16-A/20B5 affirming tliejydgmentand<iecreedated'25-06-2005 passecl by fhe Givil Judge Class I!, Pendra.Road in<;ivil:Suit No.62-Ay2Q03, wherebypeFmanentinjunGtiQn;wasgrantedagainSftheappe[lant/defendant (3} ; I have perused the jmpugnedjudgment asalso.the'judgmentpasseclby the {rial Court. Bpth the Courts below have reoorded ooncurFent findihg that the respondent/plaintiff has title over.tt'iesuit property and is in possession tliereof. Learned counsel for the appellant djd not. dispute in this appeal .that the appellant/defendantwasnqtinpossessioncivert^esUi^roperty. ' (4) ; Leamed eoynsel for, the appellant has not been able to demonstrate that anysubstantialquestjonoflawarisesfordeterniination.infhisappeal.; (5) Aocordingly, the appeal is dismjssed af the.stage of admission^ Sd/- QiUpRaosJudge