JUDGMENT S.K. Sarkar, Member. - This is an appeal preferred on behalf of Kapoor Chand against the orders dated April 30, 1979 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Money Lending, Lalitpur. Under these orders the learned Deputy Registrar rejected the application dated April 6, 1979 of the applicant requesting that he be permitted to furnish some additional particulars required under Section 26 of the U.P. Regulation of Money-Lending Act, 1976 as amended by the U.P. Regulation of Money-Lending (Amendment) Act, 1978 (U.P. Act I of 1979). 2. Learned counsel for the appellant made various submission against the refusal of the learned Deputy Registrar to accept this statement in accordance with the amended provisions of Section 26 of the U.P. Regulation of Money-Lending Act. Learned counsel did not state in the course of arguments that the refusal of the certificate which was valid upto August 31, 1978 and whose renewal was sought for the period September 1, 1978, to August 31, 1979 had been refused by the learned Deputy Registrar or that his current licence had been suspended by the learned Deputy Registrar consequent on the rejection of the application for furnishing certain additional information in accordance with Section 26 of the U.P. Regulation of Money-Lending Act, 1976 as amended by Act I of 1979 from being entertained. All the arguments of the learned counsel were addressed against this refusal and not against any refusal to renew the licence or ordering suspension or cancellation of the licence of the applicant/Money Lender. The memo of appeal also does not disclose that the renewal of the licence had been refused or the licence in question had been suspended or cancelled following the order dated April 30, 1979. Section 9 of the U.P. Regulation of Money-Lending Act, 1976 gives right of appeal to an aggrieved Money-Lender only in cases where the Registrar refuses to rant a certificate under Section 7 or cancels or suspends it under Section 88 of the Act. No appeal has been provided for in the Act against the refusal to permit filing of particulars of debts in Form 10 in accordance with the amended Section 26 of the Act. Since nothing has been shown by the learned Counsel to indicate that the licence of the appellant, money-lender had been refused to be renewed or had been cancelled or suspended, no appeal under the Act lies. 3. Since nothing has been shown by the learned Counsel to indicate that the licence of the appellant, money-lender had been refused to be renewed or had been cancelled or suspended, no appeal under the Act lies. 3. In the circumstances, this appeal is dismissed as being not entertainable under Section 9 of the U.P. Regulation of Money-Lending Act, 1976.