1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR SECOND APPEAL NO. 260 OF 2005 (Smt. Saraswatibai Narayan Bajad vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JANUARY 06, 2009. Heard Shri Wankhede, learned counsel for the appellant – original plaintiff. The appellant claimed that she was residing in the rooms constructed by Gram Panchayat since 1968 and therefore has perfected her title by adverse possession. The trial Court accepted that story particularly by placing reliance upon the notices like Exhs. 30, 31, 32, 33 & 34 issued by Gram Panchayat. The Gram Panchayat filed appeal and in appeal, lower appellate Court found that those notices did not have any dispatch numbers and were not proved to have been issued in its course of business by Gram Panchayat. It, therefore, proceeded to examine other evidence on record and found that there was no ration card or voters list and no other evidence has been adduced showing long possession since 1968. It has, therefore, found that 2 the plea of long possession or its adverse nature were not substantiated by adducing necessary evidence. Shri Wankhede, learned counsel has tried to contend that notices were issued by Gram Panchayat only and therefore, the trial Court was justified in placing reliance upon the notices. The view taken by the lower appellate Court is neither shown to be erroneous nor perverse. The case of present appellant that she was driven out by her husband in 1968 and therefore she has started residing in the rooms constructed by Gram Panchayat, itself is not accepted. The story itself appears to be rather doubtful. In the circumstances, when the view reached by the lower appellate Court cannot be labelled as erroneous or perverse, I find that no substantial question of law arises in this Second Appeal. Second Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.