G.D. Sahgal, J. - (1.) THIS is a plaintiff's 2nd appeal whose suit for declaration to the effect that she and defendants. Nos. 7 and 8 (respondents Nos. 7 and 8) were the owners in possession of the suit property and that the other defendants had no title or interest therein stands dismissed in the first appeal by the District Judge of Barabanki, it having been decreed by the Munsif of Barabanki in whose court it was instituted.
(2.) SMT . Israr Fatima, the plaintiff-appellant, is related to defendants-respondents Nos. 7 to 9 as would appear from the following pedigree: MUBARAK HUSAIN | | | Ziaul Huain Shifaul Husain | (Died Issueless) | | | | Wafau Husain Rifauj Husain. Mst. Israr Wajahat (Defdt. 7) (Defdt. 8) Fatima Husain (Plaintiff) (evacuee) (Defdt. No. 9) the property belonged to Her case was that the property belonged to Ziaul Husain and Shifaul Husain the two brothers, and even though the plaintiff was the daughter of Ziaul Husain, Shifaul Husain treated her as her daughter and gifted his half share in his property to her. he thus became owner of the property to the extent of one- half share belonging to Shifaul Husain and 1/7th of the one-hull belonging to Ziaul Husain. her total share being 4/7. Wajahat Husain migrated to Pakistan in the year 1947 There was a notification in the National Herald in April 1956 to the effect that the house of Wajahat Husain in Zaidpur was to be auctioned by the Managing Officer, Barabanki. No notice of any kind was served on her at any time indicating that the property in question had been declared as evacuee property. Her case was that there was no declaration to the effect that the property was evacuee property and if there was one, it was invalid on account of U. P. Ordinance 1 of 1949 being declared void by the Allahabad High Court in 1957 It was also asserted that the property was never described any where is belonging to Wajahat Husain. The suit, therefore, had to be filed as the plaintiff apprehended that defendants Nos. 1 to 6, namely, the Custodian Evacuee property, the Managing Officer Barabanki the Regional Settlement Commissioner, U. P. Lucknow the Custodian General, Evacuee property, New Delhi, the Chief Settlement Commissioner, India, New Delhi and the Competent Officer U. P., Lucknow, would get the property auctioned and this will adversely affect the interest of the plaintiff.
(3.) THE suit was contested only by defendants Nos. 1, 4 and 5 who are respondents Nos. 1, 4 and 5 to this appeal;