'/ ^ BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR (C.G.) FIRST APPEAL N0. </ ul /2005 AP'PELLANT/PLAINTIFF ^^"^ ^w f>.. ^ .. Sah Mood Khan, son of Shri Jahangeer Khan, aged about 52 years, resident of village Wadrafnagar, P.S. Basantpur, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, Distt. Surguja (Chhattisgarh) RESPONDENTS/ /DEFENDANTS VERSUS .1. O The Divisipnal Forest Officer, i " —. . . — . North Forest Division, Distt. i^^ Surguja (Chhattisgarh) 0"{)^' •<"^"t/"Z^-"^ -2' O ^-tate of _ chhattlsgarh' ^••>X '^" '' ll-^Etirough - the Distt. Collector, ..^••"y Distt. Surguja (C.G.) ^y^s^' '^••"" FIRST APPEAL UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CODE OF CFVIL PROCEDURE. 1908 '^ XI-HC-78 sn^rqiTf^iN; (W SII^T sh1 Ifr^ ssrsfpncpT, »Tn«'is,RiciK-iy *ll*l<ti shHl<ft '7^A...'2:^}. W^ 200 311^1 t|dth(i^)l3°"i,]ST) ?WTWfff?(T3n^T 09.01.3X17 Appellant by Shri Ganesh State/respondents by Shri| Heard on admissian. The ap[»llant/plaintiff ha<| permanent injunction simplicit^r interfering with the possession of|the The suit land is Government plaintiff was an encroacher / trssf^asser disputed that immediately after| superstrudure constructed by th^ respondents on 26.02.2001 anif The reliefclaimed bythe plaintiffltii A perusal of the evidenc|s before the leamed lower Court plaintiff did not prove even a s^ possession of the protected fore^t dismissal of the Civil Suit No. District Judge (F.T.C.), Ramanujg|anj, Thus, there is no merit in| stage of admission. There shall tje M.C.P.No.1546 of 2005 hearing also stand disposed of. qillFcl'fl-t *11*1tlT^'teccft<Rl«K ^sri^irsn^T prasad Gupta, Advocate. lAkhil Agrawal, P.L. filed a suit praying for the relief of to restrain the defendants from appellant/plaintifF over the suit land. (nd being protected forest land. The Ih view of Ex. D-7, it is also not institution of suit on 23.02.2001 the i^ plaintiff had been demolished by the the plaintiff hact been dispossessed. |iad thus become infructuous. adduced by the plaintiff / appellant ^lso goes to show that the appeltant / i^mblance of titte or rtght to remain in i^t tand. In this view of the matter, the ?-A of 2002 by the learned Additional ig|anj, Distrfct Surguja is impeccabte. this appeal whch is dismissed at the t|e no order as to costs. ahd i.ANo.2828 of2006 for out of turn SdA 1 Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, Judge