S.R.YADAV, j. - (1.) THIS second appeal preferred against the judgment and decree dated 29-1-99 passed by the Addi­tional Commissioner, Faizabad Division, Faizabad, arising out of a suit under Sec­tion 229-B of UPZA and LR Act.
(2.) 1 have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length and have gone through the relevant paper on file. The learned Counsel for the appel­lants mainly submitted that the Courts below have passed the impugned orders without considering the legal and factual position of the case. In reply the learned Counsel for the other side contended that no substantial question of law has been framed in the second appeal as such the same should be dismissed.
(3.) BOTH the Counsel narrated the his­tory of the case during the course of argu­ment. The perusal of file shows that a suit under Section 229-B of UPZA and LR Act was instituted in respect of the property as detailed down at the foot of the plaint ; during the course of the hearing an ap­plication under Section 229-D of UPZA and LR Act was moved for restraining the parties from disposal of the land in suit. The trial Court by its order dated 26- 1 1 -97 restrained the parties from disposing and selling out the hind in dispute in respect of which another application was moved whereby the order dated 26-11-97 was sought to be revised which was heard by the trial Court and order dated 30-11-98 was passed whereby the said application was dismissed and the order dated 26-11-97 was confirmed. Against the said orders, first appeal was preferred before the Com­missioner, Faizabad Division, and the same has been decided vide the Additional Commissioner's order dated 29-1-1999 which is under challenged in second ap­peal before the Board.;