- (1.) S. R. Lakha, Member. This second appeal has been filed by Om Prakash and another against the judgment and decree dated 7-3-2003 passed by learned Additional Commisisoner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad in Appeal No. 101/98-99. By the impugned order the learned Additional Commissioner has agreed with the view of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal.
(2.) FACTS in brief are that Chhango instituted a suit under Section 229-B of the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act. The trial Court framed frourteen issues and two additional issues and it gave an opportunity to both the parties to adduce evidence and of being heard. It found that the case of the plaintiff is correct and decreed the suit. The appeal preferred by Om Prakash and others was dismissed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Moradabad. They have now come up in second appeal. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and seen the papers. From a perusal of papers, it is evident that the persent appellants have failed to substantiate their claim. They based their claim on a sale-deed which had been executed by the persons who were not entitled to the land in question, who themselves claimed rights on the basis of a will. Both the Courts below have negatived the theory of the will. As the persons who claimed to have acquired rights on the basis of the will did not acquire any right on that basis, the sale-deed executed by them was void in law. The two Courts below have rightly passed the impugned orders. No substantial question of law is involved in the present appeal.
(3.) THE second appeal is not fit for admission and is dismissed summarily. Appeal dismissed. .;