Second Appeal No.110/11 07/12/2011. Shri R.P.Rathi, Government Advocate for the appellants. Shri Deependra Raghuvanshi, Advocate for the respondents. Heard on admission of this appeal. O r d e r ( oral ) This second appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is preferred by the State of Madhya Pradesh through its functionaries. The appeal is against the judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court dated 28th July, 2010 in regular First Appeal No.8A/10 whereby the appellants have been directed to pay compensation in respect of the disputed land of Survey Nos.130 and 131, village Mohammad Pura, District Shivpuri, to the respondents within four months. There is delay of 105 days in filing of the present appeal, for condonation of which I.A.677/11 has been filed by the appellants. The application filed for condonation of delay does not merit consideration for the reason that present second appeal per se is not maintainable. It is so because the respondents were declared owner of the disputed land of Survey Nos.130 and 131, village Mohammad Pura, District Shivpuri by judgment and decree of the Trial Court dated 26th August, 2009 in Civil Suit No. 09A/09 against which the appellants did not prefer any appeal. It appears that the appellants were not aggrieved by the decree of the Trial Court in favour of the respondents and presumably it is for that reason that they did not prefer any appeal against the said judgment and decree by which the respondents were declared owner of the disputed land. Vide judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court which is impugned by the appellants in the present appeal, the First Appellate Court has only affirmed the decree of the Trial Court and has granted four months' time to the appellants for payment of compensation to the respondents in respect of the disputed land mentioning that immediately upon payment of compensation the appellants will become the owner of the disputed land and the respondents in that event would cease to be the owner of the said land. In the opinion of this Court, this second appeal filed by the appellants does not raise any question of law, much less substantial question of law and, therefore, this appeal is dismissed summarily. The application filed for condonation of delay is rendered infructuous and stands disposed of accordingly. (S.N.Aggarwal) Judge ppg