The court considered whether the trial court erroneosly
cancelled the appellant’s title to the suit land. The court
held that the commission had no proprietary interest in the
suit property until the expiration of the respondent’s lease
and the appellant’s application for the lease was invalid
because the suit property which it applied for was not
available for leasing. The court was satisfied that the

appellant’s application for the lease made and approved
before the expiration of the respondent’s original lease. The
court accordingly concluded that the appellant’s title to the
suit property was not valid.