NIHAL Vs. NIADAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal could not be argued except for the fact that it was contended that the case of Bijai Misir V/s. Kali Prasad 41 Ind. Cas. 912 : 39 A. 469 : 15 A.L.J. 496 (F.B.), lent support to the appellant's contention.

(2.) Very briefly the facts are these. The respondents sought a declaration, by the suit out of which this appeal has arisen that they were the owners of a certain enclosure described as No. 49/1. Their grievance was that the present appellant, the 3 defendant in the suit, had hypothecated it as his own property and the creditor had brought it to sale with the result that the defendant No. 2 purchased it. The sale has been set aside and now the contest is between the appellant and the plaintiffs alone. The learned Judge in the Court below has found that the property does belong to the plaintiffs and that is a question of fact which has been arrived at in a clear judgment.

(3.) It has, however, been contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant that the suit is barred by the provisions of Section 233 (k) of the Land Revenue Act.