Valmiki J. Mehta, J. (Oral)

1. This appeal was passed over on the first call inasmuch as no one had appeared on behalf of the appellant. Even on the second call, no one appears for the appellant. Since this is an old RSA of the year 2008, and it is still pending at the stage of admission in spite of over two dozen dates of hearings, I do not propose to adjourn the matter and am disposing of the appeal as per the record and arguments urged on behalf of respondent no.1. Respondents have very vehemently opposed any adjournment because it is contended that appellant is enjoying benefit of possession of the suit property in spite of concurrent judgments of the courts below and only because of strategizing for getting the case adjourned no one appears for the appellant.

2. This regular second appeal is filed impugning the judgment of the appellate court dated 16.4.2008 which has dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant therein, and who is appellant herein, against the judgment and decree dated 27.7.2005 of the trial court decreeing the suit for possession in favour of the respondent-plaintiff.

3. The subject matter of the dispute is a land comprised in khasra no.112/1 and 112/2