JUDGMENT 1. - There is delay of 12 days in filing the intra-court appeal. 2. For the reasons stated in the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act duly supported by affidavit, delay of 12 days is condoned. Application is disposed of. 3. Heard on the question of admission. 4. The property left by Chander Singh and Hari Singh at Family Line, Near T.V. Towar, Alwar was declared as escheat property. An application was filed by the District Collector under Section 6(9)(2) of the Rajasthan Escheats Regulation Act, 1956. The same was allowed by the District Judge, Alwar vide order dated 22.04.2004. Notice was published in the official gazette on 08.11.2001. Objection was not filed by any one including the appellant. The property has been held to be property of Chander Singh and Hari Singh. Chander Singh died on 23.03.1996 and Hari Singh died on 03.03.1996 leaving behind no inheritor; they were not having any issue nor adopted any person. Thus, the property has been declared as escheat property. The objection was filed by the appellant claiming that since he was residing in the property and used to look after the deceased persons, therefore, the property belongs to him being legal heirs of them. However, the District Judge, Alwar vide order dated 22.04.2004 declared it as escheat property. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, writ petition was filed. The same has been dismissed. Hence, the intra-court appeal has been preferred. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant has submitted that the appellant was residing with the deceased as such property could not escheat. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, we are of the opinion that counsel was unable to point out how the appellant has right in the property or how he inherited it from the deceased persons. Simply because the appellant was residing with the deceased persons in the property, it could not be said that appellant was having interest in the property or had inherited the same. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant may be granted liberty to file suit for establishing his right, title or interest in the property in question. We are not inclined to observe anything in this regard. Suit can be filed only if permissible in accordance with law. We find no ground to interfere in the intra-court appeal. 7. We are not inclined to observe anything in this regard. Suit can be filed only if permissible in accordance with law. We find no ground to interfere in the intra-court appeal. 7. The intra-court appeal is dismissed.Appeal Dismissed. *******