HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR APPELLANT/: (Plaintiff) RESPONDENTS/: (Defendants) Second Appeal No.87 of 2010 Amartu Ram, S/o Makhanlal,) about 33 years, Caste SatnamV^R/o Village Katalbod, Post Office Katalbod, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Collector, Dhamtari (C.G.) 2. Naib Tahsildar, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) {Second appeal under Section 100 ofthe Code of Civil Procedure, 1908} Present: Mr. P.P. Sahu, counsel for the appellant. Mr. Akhil Agrawal, Panel Lawyerforthe State/respondents. Sinale Bench: Hon'ble IVIr. T.P. Sharma. J ORAL JUDGMFNT (12-8-2011) 1. By this second appeal under SectionlOO ofthe Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, theappellaht has challenged legality and proprietyofthejudgment & decree dated 15-10-2009 passed by the Additional District Judge (FTC), Dhamtari in Civil Appeal No.SA/2009 affirming the judgment & decree of dismissal of suit, dated 14-8-2008 passed by the Civil Judge Class-11, Kurud in Civil Suit No.177A/2005. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused both the judgments & decrees and records of both the Courts below. 3. Undisputed facts of the case are that the appellant herein is in possession of Government land in which he has not proved his continuous possession for more than thirty years. On the aforesaid ground, both the Courts below have dismissed the suit and the appeal. 4. Learned coynsel for the appellant submits that application for grant of lease is still pending before the respondent authorities and probably, same is under active consideration. !e"~-*,. ^^^^^^^^^.^^/-^^^^^^,^^^ r / ,^^ S5^ 3 K-~.ast;sss».i K si •-;SgSK'% 1 '^ ^"^ Soma 5. On due consideration, 1 do not find any illegality or infirmity \^\ both the judgments impugned dismissing the suit and appeal of the ^ippellant herein. Consequently, the appeal is liable to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed at the admission stage itself. No order as to costs. However, it is made clear that any claim of the appellant herein before the respondents or their authorities for lease shall not be effected by this order. The appellant is at liberty to prosecute his claim or petition for grant of lease before the revenue authoritie.s.__"--.. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge h--'V [ ?:;WS Q3SS3S