-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO. 322 OF 2008 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1596 OF 2007 IN S.A.NO. 322 /2008 Dawoodmiya Alisaheb Phansopkar .. Appellant. V/s. The Tahasildar, Ratnagiri & Ors. .. Respondents. --- Mr. Rakesh Bhatkar for the Appellant. Mrs. Geeta Mulekar, AGP for the Respondent nos. 1 and 2. Mrs. Anjali Helekar for the Respondent nos. 3 to 7. --- CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 07th OCTOBER, 2008. DATED : 07th OCTOBER, 2008. DATED : 07th OCTOBER, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Bhatkar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mrs.Mulekar, AGP for respondents nos. 1 & 2 and Mrs. Anjali Helekar for the respondents no.3 to 7. 2. The appellant is the original plaintiffs. His suit for declaration and injunction was dismissed by the trial court. The appellant’s appeal to the lower appellate court was also dismissed and therefore, the present appeal. -: 2 :- 3. There is no dispute that the suit property /suit land is belonging to the State Government. There is also no dispute that the PR card produced at Exh. 70 shows that the suit premises is reserved for public purpose of parking launches and the small boats. Mr.Bhatkar, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has made application to the Collector for allotment of part of the suit land. Merely by making application, the appellant cannot get any rights in the suit property. The appellant has asked equitable relief against the government i.e. the true owner of the suit premises. The lower appellate court has rightly dismissed the appellant’s suit. 4. No error of law much less substantial question of law is involved in the second appeal. Hence, the appeal is hereby dismissed. 5. In view of the dismissal of the second appeal, nothing survives in the civil application and the same is disposed of as such. (R.V.MORE,J.)