S.P.PANDEY, j. - (1.) THIS is a plaintiff's second appeal preferred against the judgment and decree dated October 27, 1994 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad, arising out of a judgment and decree dated May 10, 1993 passed by the learned trial Court in a suit under Section 229-B of UPZ And LR Act.
(2.) BRIEF and relevant facts of the case are that the plaintiff-appellant Chandgiram instituted a suit under Secton 229B of UPZA and LR Act for declaring him bhumidhar with transferable rights over the disputed land as detailed at the foot of the plaint. The learned trial Court after completing the requisite trial has found that the plaintiff-appellant has ut­terly failed to adduce the documentary evidence as to his title over the suit land and dismissed the aforesaid suit. Ag­grieved by this order an appeal was preferred. The learned Addl. Commis­sioner (sic) has upheld the aforesaid order passed by the learned trial Court and dis­missed and appeal too. Hence, this second appeal. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and perused the records on file. None appeared for the respondent despite due notice. For the appellant it was contended that the learned lower appel­lant Court has illegally dismissed the ap­peal on the sole ground that the plaintiff could not proved himself to be bhumidhar with transferable rights that the plaintiff-appellant has atleasl proved that he is en­titled to be declared as bhumidhar with none transferable rights that the aforesaid suit land granted by the U.P. State under Government Grants Act under coloniza­tion scheme and later on by operation of the law, the plaintiff became bhumidhar with transferable rights over the disputed land, that the judgments and decree passed by the learned Courts below are perverse and based on surmises and conjectures which deserve to he set aside.
(3.) I have closely and carefully con­sidered the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant and have also gone through the relevant records on file. On close perusal of the records it is manifestly clear that the learned lower appellate Court has proper­ly examined the points at issue in correct perspective of law and has drawn correct conclusion to the effect that the suit land is colonization scheme land over which no right of bhumidhar with transferable rights can be conferred upon the appel­lant. In fact the plaintiff appellant has miserably failed to substantiate his claims over the dispute land. No cogent and con­vincing evidence has been adduced by him in support of his claims over the suit land. To my mind the aforesaid impugned judg­ment and order passed by the learned lower appellate Court is sustainable well founded and wholly warranted in law it is also worthwhile to mention here that I find no any substantial question of law involved in this second appeal warranting any interference by this Court.;