(1.) THIS case has been referred to a larger Bench by reason of a conflict of opinion between a decision of the Oudh Chief Court in Ram Dat v. Suraj Bux, 1948 Oudh W. N. 13 and of the Allahabad High Court in Bam Ban Bijai Prasad Singh v. Sarjoo Singh A. I. R. (34) 1947 ALL. 188. After having been given the facts, however, we are of opinion that the point does not arise and this appeal must fail on another ground.
(2.) A short pedigree will be helpful in understanding the facts of the case. It runs as follows:
(3.) THE lower appellate Court has held that the sale was for consideration and for legal necessity and it was thus a valid sale. It is, however, urged that, by reason of the fact that Smt Babban did not appear in the proceedings under the Encumbered Estates Act and did not file objections under Section 11 of the Act, her title in the property had ceased and the plaintiffs were entitled to claim it.