LALTA PRASAD Vs. LATE MOIN YAR KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals are from an award given on 26th November 1957 by the Jagirdars Debt Settlement Board. The essential facts are as follows :

(2.) Bankatlal Badruka and Maharudrappa Kheni and others filed their claims against the estate left by Rasul Yar Jung Mustafa Yar Khan. Asgarunnisa Begum and others claimed their debts against the estate of Moin Yar Khan. We are not concerned with the other claims which also were considered by the Board. It appears that Nawab Rasool Yar Jung, who was the jagirdar died leaving Karunnisa Begum as his widow: Moin Yar Khan, Mustafa Yar Khan and Khaja Yar Khan as his sons and also Ahmedunnisa Begum, Mohammadunnisa Begum, Barkatunnisa Begum, Muncerunnisa, Begum and Marijunnisa Begum as daughters. At the time when jagirs were abolished, Moin Yar Khan was living. He died before the Commutation Regulation was brought into force. On the basis of the abovesaid claims preferred by the creditors the Jagirdars Debt Settlement Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board, decided preliminary issues visualised by Section 24 of the Hyderabad Jagirdars Debt Settlement Act of 1952 and after making proper enquiries determined the property of Nawab Kasool Yar Jung and Moin Yar Khan and also the liability of the said two jagirdars, regarding the debts payable to various creditors. After determining the paying capacity of the two jagirdars as equal to 60 per cent of the total value of the property of the said debtors, the Board gave several directions regarding the realisation of the debts in its award dated 26th November, 1957.

(3.) Dissatisfied with the abovesaid award, Lalta Prasad preferred A. S. 496/57 and Mustafa Yar Khan and others, legal representatives of the debtors-jagirdars, preferred A. S. 253/58. These appeals came for hearing before Umamaheswaram and Chandrasekhara Sastry, JJ. The learned Judges thought that the question involved in the appeals is of great importance affecting a large number of cases pending before the Board. They therefore referred these two appeals to a Full Bench and that is how these cases have come before us.