PANCHAITI AKHARA Vs. BENI BAHADUR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A preliminary objection is taken that no second appeal lies and that objection seems to be valid.

(2.) It appears that the decree-holder, the appellant in this case, obtained a decree from the Court of Small Causes against the respondent. The decree was transferred to the Court of Muusif, Allahabad, in order to enable the decree-holder to attach immovable property. He sought the attachment of certain groves, hold by baa judgment-debtor, in an area to which the Bundelkhand Land Alienation Act applies. The judgment-debtor objected, that under Section 16 of the above mentioned. Act the groves were not saleable in execution of a decree. The decree- holder then made a statement to the effect that he wanted to sell not the groves as they stood but only the trees. Evidently he meant that the purchaser would be required to cut the trees and take the timber or wood away. The question, therefore, that arose in the case was whether the trees were, apart from the land or as apart of the groves situated in an area to which the Bundelkhand Land Alienation Act applies, saleable, the judgment-debtor being a member of the agricultural tribe.

(3.) The learned Munsif allowed the objection of the judgment-debtor and held that the trees were not saleable. The learned District Judge affirmed this decision on appeal. The decree-holder has come in second appeal.