(1.) The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the suit brought by the plaintiffs-appellants for a declaration of their title to a two-thirds share of the house in dispute was maintainable against the receiver without any notice under Section 80 of the Civil P. C..
(2.) The plaintiffs are the brothers of one Behari Lal, who was adjudicated an insolvent. The defendant was appointed an Official Receiver under Section 57 of the Provincial Insolvency Act, V of 1920, and in that capacity he took charge of the estate of the insolvent, including the house in dispute whereof a two-third share is now claimed by the plaintiffs.
(3.) On the date fixed for the first hearing the receiver appeared and filed his defence; but no plea was raised by him regarding the omission of the plaintiffs to send him a notice of the kind above referred to, but on the date fixed for final hearing, he filed an application urging that the suit was not maintainable without such notice; and he asked the Court to take cognizance of that objection and add another issue to those which had bean previously framed. The Court below amended the issues and after hearing arguments gave effect to that objection and dismissed the claim.