ABDUL GHAFOOR Vs. ABDUS SALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel had raised a short point and that is whether the plaintiffs who had. not filed an objection under Section 11, U. P. Encumbered Estates Act, could ignore the proceedings before the learned Special Judge and come to the civil court for a declaration that the property which had been included by the landlord in his written statement under Section 8 belonged to the plaintiffs. The learned single Judge before whom the case came up referred it to a larger Bench but in view of the Pull Bench decision in -- 'krishnapal Singh v. Mst. Babban', AIR 1952 All 227 (A), the learned Judge changed the order and said that instead of a Full Bench the case may be listed before a Division Bench. Today, however, the learned counsel has raised a slightly different point. He has urged that he had made a mistake in urging before the learned single Judge that the plaintiffs had filed no objection under Section 11 and he referred us to the replication filed by the plaintiffs to show that they had, as a matter of fact, filed an objection under Section 11. In paras. 19 and 20 of the replication, the plaintiffs pleaded that they were not parties to the Encumbered Estates Act proceedings and had no information or knowledge of these proceedings and said that

(2.) IN the case of debts, the Legislature has provided in Section 13, U. P. Encumbered Estates act, that if the creditors do not put forward their claims within a certain period, the claims would be deemed to be discharged for all purposes. If it was the intention of the Legislature that the same result should follow if the owner of a property which had been included in the list given by the landlord applicant had failed to file his objection under Section 11 and his right to the property should cease or his right to file a suit for a declaration of his title should be barred, then a section similar to Section 13 would have been enacted. We have no doubt that the contentions advanced by learned counsel have no force. The appeal, therefore, is dismissed but as the other side is not represented, we make no order as to costs.