SITA RAM Vs. BAHSI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent raises the question whether the provisions of Rule 9 of Order 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure apply to proceedings under the Displaced Persons (Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951.

(2.) On 13-9-1946, Brij Lal, Kishan Gopal and Ram Nath mortgaged their houses in Pakistan to one Banshi Ram for a sum of Rs. 10,000/-. On 11th May, 1952, the mortgagee presented an application under S. 10 of the Displaced Persons (Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951, in which he prayed that the said money be created as the first charge on the compensation, if any, payable to the respondents in respect of the mortgaged property. When this application came up for hearing before the Tribunal, the mortgagee was not present either in person or through counsel but the counsel for the mortgagors was present. The Tribunal accordingly dismissed the mortgagee's application in default.

(3.) On 21-5-1953, the mortgagee presented a fresh application under S. 10 of the Act of 1951 in which he repeated the prayer which had been made by him in the earlier application. The mortgagors resisted this application and stated that as the first application presented by the mortgagee was dismissed in default and as no application was made for the setting aside of the order of dismissal it was not within the competence of the Tribunal to entertain the second application. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure do not apply to the case and that there is no provision in the Act of 1951 which bars such applications. In this view of the case the Tribunal dismissed this plea, passed a decree in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- and directed that this amount shall be the first charge on the compensation, if any, paid in respect of the mortgaged property. The order of the Tribunal was upheld by a learned Single Judge of this Court. The mortgagors have appealed.