MIR SYED HUSAIN Vs. RASOO SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Rule is directed against the order of the Judge dismissing an execution ease for want of prosecution. My mind has changed very considerably with regard to the matter during the argument, but I have come to the conclusion that having regard to the fact that the Court imposed on the decree holder an order, which it had no jurisdiction to make on 9 July, that is to say a portion only of the holding should be sold at a time when the provisions relating to that matter of the amended Bihar Tenancy Act were not enforced, the decree-holder should have some relief in this case.

(2.) I would therefore set aside the order of the Judge of 26 July 1938, but the petitioner must pay the costs of the respondents to this application, hearing fee two gold mohurs.