IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Second Appeal No. 39 of 2009 [ Smt. Kamla Kashyap W/o Sri Goverdhan Kashyap R/o Dobanola, Narsingh Badi, Almora. ...…………. Appellant Versus Guddi Kannojiya D/o Sri Chunni Lal Sisya Choti Guru R/o Mohalla Narisnghbadi, Almora Mohalla Balmiki Basti, Rajpur, Almora. ...………… Respondent Mrs. Pushpa Joshi and Mr. Amit Kapri, Advocates for the appellant. Mr. Harsh Vardhan Sah, Advocate for the respondent. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 27.05.2009, passed by first appellate court (District Judge, Almora) in Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2008, whereby the judgment and decree dated 18.12.2008, passed by the trial court [Chief Judicial Magistrate / Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Almora] 2 in Suit No. 43 of 2007, was affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed. 3) Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff / respondent instituted suit No. 43 of 2007, with the averments that she is owner of property in suit situated in Narsingh Bari, Almora, and the defendant / appellant was allowed to occupy said promises as a licensee. The suit was filed for recovery of possession of the property. The defendant contested the suit but did not deny the title of the plaintiff. The trial court after recording the evidence and hearing the parties, decreed the suit for possession vide its judgment and decree dated 18.12.2008. The defendant filed the first appeal before the lower appellate court, which is also dismissed vide impugned judgment and decree, passed by said court (District Judge, Almora). 4) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the impugned judgment and decree passed by the first appellate court, and the one passed by the trial court, this Court does not find any substantial question of law involved in this appeal. There are concurrent findings of fact against the defendant / appellant. 5) Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, summarily with the observation that the defendant / appellant is 3 allowed four months time from today to vacate the property in suit and hand it over to the plaintiff / respondent, failing which the decree passed by the courts below shall be executed. (Stay Application No. 6337 of 2009 also stands dismissed, accordingly). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. July 27, 2009. H. Negi