ONKAR SINGH Vs. RAMESHWAR MINOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants made an application under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act, which was forwarded to the Special Judge, 1st Grade, Budaun. In the written statement which was filed by them under Section 8, Encumbered Estates Act, they mentioned the villages Deorania and jarauna among their property which was liable for the payment of their debts. Dori Lal and others filed a joint written statement under Section 11 of the Act wherein they claimed that they were the owners of these villages and were in possession of them and this property was therefore not liable to attachment and sale in satisfaction of the debts of the landlord applicants. There is nothing in the written statement to indicate the extent of the shares of each of the persons who filed the joint written statement. The learned Special Judge after a consideration of the evidence produced by the parties found that the objectors were the owners of these two villages and that they did not belong to the landlord-applicants. He therefore allowed the objection and deleted these two villages from the list of the property which was liable for the payment of the debts of the applicants. It is against this decision that the present appeal has been filed by the applicants.

(2.) DORI Lal, one of the respondents, died during the pendency of the appeal and his heirs were not brought on the record. The question for determination is whether the entire appeal fails or only to the extent of the share of Dori Lal.

(3.) IT has been contended on behalf of the appellants that the share of Doli Lal in the property in dispute was only 3 annas 6 pies out of eight annas share as would appear from the sale deed dated 6-4-1937, which was on the record and in view of this evidence the appeal did not abate as a whole but only to the extent of Dori Lal's share. It has also been contended that merely because the share of Dori Lal in the property in dispute was not mentioned in the objection filed fay Kirn and others jointly or in the judgment of the Court that would not prevent the Court from determining his share in order to decide as to what extent the appeal had abated.