( 1 ) THESE two applications in revision have been heard together as they arise out of execution proceedings in respect of the same decree. Application No. 5 of 1949, came up for hearing before a learned Judge of this Court who found that the question involved was of some importance and doubted the soundness of the decision of a Division Bench in -- durga Baksh singh v. Umanath Baksh Singh, AIR 1944 Oudh 90 (A ). He, therefore, directed that the application may be placed before a Full Bench for hearing. The other application for revision, no. 180 of 1951, was also subsequently ordered to be put up along with revision application No. 5 of 1949.

( 2 ) ONE Mulhay obtained a decree under Section 183 of the U. P. Tenancy Act against Mathura and others on 11-9-1946. As Mathura was in doubt as to whether an appeal lay to the commissioner or to the District Judge he instituted two appeals -- one in the Court of the commissioner and another in the Court of the District Judge.

( 3 ) BOTH these were dismissed. The appeal to the Commissioner was dismissed on 14-4-1947, on the ground that no appeal lay to him while the appeal instituted in the Court of the District Judge was d