Harnam Singh, J. - (1.) THE question raised in Letters Patent Appeal No. 39 of 1950 is whether in execution proceedings Civil Court have jurisdiction to appoint a Receiver for the realization of rents and profits of evacuee property for payment to the D.H.
(2.) IN Civil Suit No. 18 of 1924 the trial Court passed a preliminary decree for Rs. 30,764/11/5 in favour of the Simla Banking and Industrial Company Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the company, against Khan Bahadur Khwaja Abdul Ahad Defendant on 9 -7 -1924, and on 3 -3 -1925, a final decree was passed. Khan Bahadur Abdul Ahad having died On 12 -5 -1928, a personal decree was passed against the legal representatives of the J.D. to the extent of the estate of the deceased in their possession. In the execution proceedings arising out of the application for execution of the decree made on 1 -3 -1937, the Company applied on 29 -3 -1941, for the appointment of a Receiver. The application failed in the executing Court and the order of the executing Court was upheld by Din Mohammad, J., on 19 -6 -1944. From the judgment of Din Mohammad, J., passed on 11 -7 -1944, the company appealed under Clause 10, Letters Patent. On 17 -4 -1945, a D.B. of the H.C. of Judicature at Lahore allowed the Letters Patent Appeal, set aside the judgment of the Single Judge and directed the executing Court to appoint a Receiver as prayed.
(3.) PROCEEDINGS for the appointment of a receiver were pending in the executing Court when the Punjab Province was divided under Section 4, Independence Act, 1947.;