Judgement

JAGANNADHADAS, J. : This is an appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Punjab by leave granted under Art. 133 of the Constitution read with Ss. 109 and 110 and O. 45, R. 2 Civil P. C. The appeal arises out of a suit filed in 1938 by the respondent herein, Raja Shiv Rattan Dev Sing, Raja of Poonch against (1) Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar, (2) Local Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee of Sri Darbar Sahib, Amritsar, and (3) 57 Sikhs, for a declaration to the effect that a house known as Bunga Raja Dhian Singh in Amritsar and four shops appurtenant thereto, two of which are close to the Sikh Gurdwara, Sri Darbar Sahib, belong to him and are his private property and that they are not a Sikh Gurdwara.

The suit which was filed in 1938 was dismissed by the trial Court on certain preliminary issues and that dismissal was reversed on first appeal and the suit was remanded. On second appeal therefrom to the High Court the dismissal by the trial court was restored by a Single Judge in 1941 Against this there was a Letters Patent Appeal to a Bench.

That appeal was first heard by a Bench which, after hearing the matter and coming to some tentative conclusions, on the points raised before them, made an order dated 16-6-1944, adjourning the hearing of the appeal to a later date for reasons set out therein. For one reason or other this appeal could not be taken up for a considerable time. It ultimately came up for final disposal before a Bench of the High Court in the year 1950.

The learned Judges, by their judgment dated 20-6-1950, gave certain findings on the preliminary issues raised and as a result thereof reversed the judgment of the Single Judge of the High Court, allowed the appeal and returned the ease back to the trial Court for proceeding in accordance with law". It is against this order of the High Court that the present appeal has been brought to this Court.

2. A preliminary objection has been raised before us at the outset that this appeal is incompetent and that the provisions under which leave was granted by the High Court were inapplicable to the case, inasmuch as the order of the High Court appealed against is not a final order within the meaning of Art. 133 of the Constitution.

It may also be mentioned that at the conclusion of the hearing, the learned Attorney-General mentioned to us that since the passing of the order of the High Court in 1950 returning the case for further disposal, the trial Court has disposed of the case, there having been no stay and that the suit has since been decreed in favour of the present respondent and that inasmuch as no appeal has been filed against that decree, this is an additional ground by reason of which the appeal is incompetent.

A certified copy of the judgment of the trial Court on remand has been since placed before us and we have heard further arguments on this preliminary objection in the light thereof. This will be dealt with at the end of this judgment.

3. The present litigation arises out of certain events relating to the suit property which arose out of the provisions of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925, (Punjab Act VIII of 1925) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Act came into force on 1-11-1925. Under S. 3(2) of the Act, the Provincial Government issued a notification on 13-12-1927, with reference to a claim made and list forwarded to the Government under S. 3(1) alleging that the suit properties belong to the Sikh Gurdwara, Harmandir Sahib (Darbar Sahib).

Three persons including the present respondent filed objections thereto under S. 5(1) of the Act, each claiming the properties as his own. The objections of the other two, viz., Nikka Singh and Suchat Singh were, in course of time, either withdrawn or ultimately dismissed. The objection by the respondent, Raja of Poonch, came up for consideration before the Sikh Gurdwara Tribunal, constituted under the Act. There was a compromise between the Raja and the Local Committee of the Gurdwara and as a result