- (1.) List has been revised. No one appears for the respondent. I have heard the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant and have perused the record.
(2.) The present second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 23.9.1978 passed by 4th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad in Civil Appeal No.223 of 1976 arising out of Original Suit No.362 of 1969.
(3.) Original Suit No. 362 of 1969 was instituted by the plaintiff-respondent, Smt. Bijan, for permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant-appellants so as to restrain them from attaching and selling the house of the plaintiff, as detailed at the foot of the plaint, in recovery proceedings for the alleged liabilities of defendant no.3 (Manzoor Ilahi) or late Kailash Chandra Vakil. Plaintiff's case was that the house in question was purchased by her vide sale-deed dated 30.08.1948 (Exibit-7) from her own funds and that neither defendant no.3 nor Kailash Chandra had any concern with the same. It was claimed that the house was not at all liable either to be attached or sold in realisation of the alleged liabilities of the defendant no.3 in connection with any surety for the loan taken by late Sri Kailash Chandra. It was further pleaded that the house in suit could not have been given in security for securing Taqavi loan as per the Note Appended to Rule 38 of the Taqavi Rules framed under the U.P. Agriculturist Loans Act, 1885, which provided that a house property could not be accepted as security for Taqavi loan.;