B.P.NILRATNA, J. - (1.) THIS second appeal has been filed by Raj Narain S/o Lal Bihari against the judgment and decree dated 31-3-99 passed by the learned Addl. Commissioner, Allahabad Division, in appeal No. 30/19 of 1996/98-99/A1-lahabad. By the impugned order, the learned Additional Commissioner dis­missed the appeal and upheld the order dated 26-12-95 passed by the trial Court in suit No. 139/55 of 1995 under Section 229-B of UPZAandLRAct.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that Raj Narain instituted the suit im-pleading Gaon Sabha as well as the State as defendants. He claimed rights on the basis of long possession. The trial Court found that plaintiff failed to prove his rights and dis­missed the suit. On appeal, learned Additional Commissioner agreed with the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. Feeling aggrieved by this order, Raj Narain has filed the present second appeal before the Board. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and have perused the papers. The land in question is property of Gaon Sabha. No rights could accrue to any person in such land on the basis of adverse possession. The learned Courts below have rightly found that the plaintiff could not ac­quire any rights in the land in dispute. There is no question of law involved in the present second appeal. The Courts below have rightly dismissed the suit of the plaintiff.
(3.) THE appeal is not fit for admission and is dismissed accordingly. Appeal dismissed.;