COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BSLASPUR Slnale Bench : Hon'ble Shri Diiie Raosaheb Deshiiiukh, J. AppeSiant PSaJntiff Second Appea! No.546 of 2007 Smt. Rani Mangwans, W/o Shri Amar Mangwani, aged about 32 years, R/o Nariyal Kothl, Dayaiband, Biiaspur, Tahsii and District Bilaspur (C.G.) Y \ Respondent DefendanS Kaliu Miya (Pentar), S/o Amir Mohammad, R/o Falitiaj Jaiswa! Bada, beside Suruchi Bhojnalaya, Sadar Bazar, Biiaspur, P.0. Goal Bazar, Tahsii and District Bilaspur (C.G.) Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civli Procedure Present: Shri Goutam Khetrapal, counsei for the appellant. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this 23rd day ofApril, 2008) Heard on admission. (2) The appeJlant/plalntlff is aggrieved by the judgmentand decree dated 15-10-2007 passed in CMI Appeal No.11-A/2007 by the District Judge, BJIaspur affirming the judgment and decree dated 05-05-2007 passed In Civii Sujt No. 175-A/2005 by the IVth Ch/ii Judge Ctass-I, Bilaspur. (3) The appellant/pjaintjff had instituted a suit for possession, permanent Injundion and damages on the ground that the respondent/defendant had encroached upon a portion of the suft land ad-measuring 80 Sq.Ft. ovmed by her. The respondent/defendant reslsted the suit on the ground that he v^as not Jn possession ofthe sult 'N, 2-- iand. The triai Court granted a decree for possession, butvrefese^to grant damages. Both the findings recorded by the trial Court were affirmed in appea! by the iower appeliate Court. (4) Shri Goutam Khetrapa), iearned counsej for the appeliant has not been ab!e to create any dent in the findings recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the tovver appeiiate Court. The said findings are pure^ findings of fact. No question of iaw is Invoived in this appeai, v^iich is accordingiy dlsmissed at the stage of admlssion. ___^-^-—-—"^ [ ' Sd/- DilipRaosahebDeshmukh Judge <: Gopal 'v. "' 'B