1 S. B. Civil Second Appeal No. 414/2005 (Nagar Parishad, Bhilwara v. Hukmichand) Date of Order: :22-01-2007 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr. D.C.Sharma, for apellant. Mr.Sandeep Saruparia, for respondent. Heard learned counsel for the parties. It appears from the facts that a plot was allotted to the plaintiff as back as on 4th May, 1974, after charng Rs.2672/-. The palintiff's contention is that he was in possession of the suit property and after receipt of letter from Municipal Board, Bhilwara, dated 15th July, 1974, the plaintiff also deposited Rs.500/- as demanded by the Municipal Board and, thereafter again, on 16th October, 1975, deposited Rs.1600/-. The defendant submits that the plaintiff's plot allotment was cancellled, but that fact has not been proved by the defendant as held by the two courts below as the order of cancellation of plot was not placed on record by the defenant-appellant. In view of the above, the two courts-below held that the plaintiff-respondent cannot be treated to be trespasser. After going through the reasons given in the impugned judgments and decrees of the two courts-below dated 1st May, 2002 and 22nd September, 2004, I do not find any merit in this 2 appeal. No substantial question of law is involved in this appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. Scd.