JUDGMENT

Kaushal Kishore, Member - This is a plaintiff's second appeal against the judgement and decree dated 13-12-1971 by the learned Additional Commissioner, Bareilly Division, Bareilly, dismissing the appeal the upholding the judgement and decree by the learned trial Court dated 6-4-1970 in a suit under section 229-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act.

2. The facts of the case are that three plots were mortgaged by the plaintiff in favour of the defendant-respondents by a registered mortgage-deed dated 19-4-1943, According to the plaintiff, he repaid the debt and obtained the possession but Farzi entries in favour of the defendant continued and later on the defendant became sirdari, so the plaintiff sought a declaration of his rights. Both the Courts have held that the plaintiff had not regained the possession of the land in suit.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant who alone was present and none for the respondent was present inspite of due notice. I have also perused the record.

4. The only point pressed by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the learned lower appellate Court and the learned trial Court too, took an incorrect view