1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Second Appeal No.167 of 2009 [Chotelal Dayaram Dharwar Vs. Supdt., Excise Deptt., State of Mah.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. Amol Mardikar, Adv., for the appellant. Mr. D.B. Thakire, AGP for respondent. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI,J. DATE : 06th July, 2009. 1. Heard learned Adv. Mr. Amol Mardikar for the appellant and learned AGP Mr. Deepak Thakre for the respondent sole. 2. The Trial Court dismissed the suit seeking a declaratory relief that the plaintiff has perfected the title by adverse possession. 3. The Trial Court found that the plaintiff s possession being hostile is not proved. 4. Considering the grounds raised in the appeal, the First Appellate Court recorded following findings:- 15. ........................... 2 ...........However, though the plaintiff is claiming relief of adverse possession against them, but the plaintiff not made party to the State Government Nazul Government for the best reasons known to her. This itself makes clear that the suit of the plaintiff is not tenable due to non-joinder of necessary party to the Nazul Government. So also behind the back of the Government, it is not possible to the Court to pass any order in the instant case. This is also one of the ground which creates doubt on the case of the plaintiff. 5. The underlined portion in the findings is not shown to be factually incorrect. It is not shown that the finding is perverse and rendered without considering any evidence on record. The Substantial Questions of Law so styled in appeal do not arise. 6. In the circumstances, appeal has no merit, and is dismissed. Judge |Hedau| 3