' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The parties are closely related. On 29-9-1969 the respondent was transferred a house in Bhai Pheru under Settlement Scheme No, VII. On 10-6-1974 he brought a suit for possession of the house against the petitioner alleging that the latter had forcefully occupied it.
The suit was resisted by the petitioner who alleged that the house had been transferred to his father and that it did not belong to respondent. The trial Court decreed the suit and its judgment was upheld by the Additional District Judge in first appeal and by the High Court in revisional jurisdiction. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. In support of his case the respondent has produced the order of allotment of the house in his favour. In his plaint he has given the boundaries of the house. The petitioner alleged that the house in his occupation was not the same which had been transferred to the respondent. He also produced an order by which a house in Bhai Pheru had been transferred to his father. However, he led no evidence to show that the house transferred to his father was the same as the house in dispute. In the circumstances, we find no basis for interfering with the concurrent findings of the three Courts. Leave is refused.