RSA 118/2005 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. P.S. Goswami, learned counsel for the appellant. Altho ugh, this appeal was filed in the year 2004, but the defects indicated in the of fice note towards entertaining the same have not been removed. No steps have bee n taken. On that ground alone, the appeal is liable to be dismissed. The appellant has challenged the judgment and decree dated 21.1. 2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Jorhat affirming the judgm ent and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) No. 1, Jorhat in T.S. No. 2/1997 decreeing the suit holding that the plaintiffs have right, titl e and interest over the suit land and they are entitled to get the Khas Patta th ereof by removing all the structures thereon. On being asked, Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the appellant s ubmits that both the Court below having not appreciated the evidence adduced by the appellant properly, the impugned judgment and decree is liable to be interfe red with. In the Memo of Appeal, no substantial question of law has been f ormulated. The grounds urged are all on facts. Moreover Goswami, learned counsel for the appellant fairly submits that after filing of the appeal, there is no c ontact with the appellant. In view of the above, this appeal stands dismissed.