SYED IQBAL HUSAIN Vs. RAMESHWAR DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an execution second appeal filed by Syed Iqbal Husain.

(2.) THE predecessor of the decree-holder-respondents had advanced some money to Ch. Afzal Husain. After his death, a -.suit for recovery of the amount was filed against the heirs of Ch. Afzal Husain including Syed Iqbal Husain. The suit was decreed. In execution of that decree, certain Bhumidhari plots were put to sale and were auctioned. Iqbal Husain had filed an objection against the sale under Order 21, Rule 90, C.P.C. which was rejected. He then filed the objection that the property sold belonged to him personally and was not the asset of Ch. Afzal Husain and, as such, was not liable to be sold in execution of the decree. It should be noted here that the decree pass ed was against the asset of Ch. Afzal Husain in the hands of this judgment-debtor.

(3.) THERE is no dispute that Ch. Afzal Husain had made a Waqf of his Zamindari property. The plots in suit were the Sir land appurtenant to that Za mindari. After the creation of the waqf, its character had ceased but in the reve nue papers it continued to be recorded as Sir land. After the enforcement of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, it was recorded as Bhumidhari of Iqbal Husain. According to the decree-holders these plots were the assets of Ch. Afzal Husain in the hands of the judgment-debtor and, as such, the plots were rightly auctioned in execution of the decree.