-^ jl!l:- :liii:[ il!' :W: li: <^ HJGH COURT OF CHHATT3SGARH AT BILASPUR Sinaie Bench : Hon'ble Shn Di!i8 Raosaheb Deshmukh. J. AspeISant Second ApDeai No.64^2008 Manthir, S/o Suklai Sahu, Aged about 45 years, R/o Viilage Junwani, Patwari Ha!ka No.118, Tahsi! Gunderdehi, Djstrict Durg (C.G.) Versus 1. Ramkunwar Baj W/o Tiju Ram Sahu, Aged about 50 :years, R/o Viliage Parsooda (Kajrabandha) Tahsii Gunderdehi, District Durg (C.G.) 2. State of Chhattisgarh, Through :Coilector, Durg(Cl.G.) IVSesno of Second Appeal under:Section 100 of the Gode.of Civli Proceclyrt,; Re.spondents Present : , Shri Vipin Tiwari, counsel for the appeliant. ORALORDER (Passed on 18tn February, 2008) Heard on 1A.NoJ/2008,whlch Is anapp!ication for condonation of delay of 5 days in fiiing this appeai. (2) For the reasons mentioned in th'e application, it is allowed and the deiay in fiiing this second appeai is condoned. (3) Heard on admission. (4) The appeiiant is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 27-09-2007 passed by the Flfth Addjtional District Judge, Durg in Civii Appeal N6.38-A/200S affirming the Judgment and decree dated 07-02-2005 passed by the Ninth Clvil Judge C!ass !1, Durg in Civl! Suit No.88"A/2002 whereby both the Courts below have held the suit was barred by limitatjon. (5) Learned counsej for the appeliant did not dlspute that the appellant was apartyin Civil Suit No.52-A/1994. Both the Coyrts below have heid that the appejlant had, In Clvi! Sult No.52-A/1994 in which the judgnient was delivered on 05-03-1998, knowledge of the registered saie deed dated 26-06-1969 executedbyBisahu Ram in favour of his wife Ganga Bai. Both the Courts below have he!d thatthe suitfiledon 02.03.2002 was ^' 1—2-- thus barred by iimitation as jt has not been fiied within 3 yegrs from the date when cause of actlon first accrued in favour of the appe!!anVplaJntIff. Learned counsei for the appeJiant has not been abte to point out any iijegalifr^ in the above finding recorded by both the Courts below. No substantiai question of iaw therefore arises for determination in this appeai, which is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admi'ssion. Sd/- DUip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge Turnans Y r^: