The plaintiff and appellant moved for a new trial in the court below on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence, but he took no exception to the order denying such motion.  We can not, therefore, review the evidence.

The court found as a fact that the allegations of the complaint were not proven.  This is a sufficient finding to support a judgment acquitting the defendant  of the complaint.  No facts are stated in the decision  which in any way indicate that the plaintiff is  the owner of the land in question, or has any interest therein.

The answer contains a general  denial and an admission that the  defendant is in  possession of a part  of the land described in the  complaint.  There  is nothing  in  the answer which  in any way admits that the plaintiff is the owner of the land or has any interest therein.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed,  with the costs of this instance against the appellant.  So ordered.

Arellano, C  J., Torres, Mapa, Johnson, Carson, and Tracey, JJ., concur.