Mr. Akhauri, then submits that no doubt, both the courts below have rightly observed that the Hukumnama is forged one but even assuming for the sake of argument that the same is not forged one, still in the absence of any evidence put forth by the plaintiff that the settlers of the Humkanama themselves were having any right, title and interest over the suit land, the Hukumnama cannot convey any right, title or interest to the plaintiff or his ancestors. It is further submitted by Mr. Akhauri that both the courts below have rightly came to the conclusion, basing upon the evidence in the record that the plaintiff has not been in possession of the suit land, at the time of filing of the suit, hence there is no way, the relief of injunction could have been granted in his favour. It is next submitted by Mr. Akhauri that the plaintiff even could not produce any revenue record to suggest any right, title or interest of him over the suit land. On the other hand, the defendants by cogent evidence have established beyond reasonable doubt that the suit land is a protected forest land and thus the plaintiff having no right, title and interest over the Protected Forest Sal Jungle Land, the suit of the plaintiff as well as the civil appeal has rightly been dismissed by both the courts below. Hence, it is submitted that this appeal being without any merit which does not involve any substantial question of law; be dismissed.
