ORDER: This civil revision by Shamsuddin is directed against the order of the Civil Judge, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow allowing the objection of the opposite party Abbas Ali under Order 21, Rule 101. Civil P. C. It arises out of the following facts.

2. One Mohammad Jafar made a mortgage of five shops on the ground floor and two shops on the first floor situate at Sanitary Road, in Mohalla Maulviganj, in the city of Lucknow. Abbas Ali enforced the mortgage against Mohammad Anwar, Ashraf Jahan Begam and Masooma Begum, son, daughter and widow respectively of Mohammad Jafar, after the latter's death. He obtained a decree for sale and purchased the mortgaged property at a Court sale held on December 13, 1955. A warrant for delivery very of possession was issued and possession was delivered to him on November 5, 1957 under the provisions of O. 21, R. 36, Civil P. C., as the various shops were in the possession of tenants. Subsequently, Sultan Jahan Begum instituted Regular Suit No. 62 of 1961 in the Court of the Civil Judge for partition of her one-third share in the disputed properties and for possession over her partitioned share. She alleged in that suit that one Wahid Ali had three sons, Mohammad Jafar (mortgagor), Husain Ahmad and Nasir Ahmad, and two daughters. Ahmadi Begum and Bismillah Begam. Husain Ahmad purchased the site of the disputed shops and constructed these thereon. On his death, the inheritance devolved upon her (Sultan Jahan Begum) to the extent of one-third, she being Hussain Ahmad's daughter by his first wife Noor Jahan, and upon Shah Jahan Begum, to the extent of another one-third, she also being the daughter of Husain Ahmad by his second wife Bismillah Begum and the remaining one-third devolved upon Husain Ahmad's two brothers, Mohammad Jafar (the mortgagor) and Nasir Ahmad, and upon his two sisters, Ahmadi Begum and Bismillah Begum. Mohammad Jafar had, therefore, according to inheritance, an insignificant share in the properties and had no right to mortgage the properties in their entirety so as to bind her or the other co-sharers.

The suit was instituted against all the heirs of Mohammad Jafar, the original mortgagor, and against Abbas Ali, the mortgagee auction-purchaser. Abbas Ali filed a written statement in which he averred that Noor Jahan was not the wife of Husain Ahmad and Sultanjahan Begum was not Husain Ahmad's daughter by Noor Jahan and as such she had no right or title to the mortgaged property. He took various other pleas also to nonsuit her. Sultan Jahan Begum then withdrew her suit on April 2, 1964 against Abbas Ali, without liberty to institute a fresh suit. Her suit was decreed against the other defendants in the suit. A preliminary decree for partition was prepared, and after it had become final, she put it in execution and prayed for delivery of possession over her partitioned one-third share under the provisions of Order 21, Rule 35. Civil P. C. She died during the pendency of the execution proceedings and was substituted by Shamsuddin, the petitioner before me, her son. A warrant for delivery of possession was issued and possession was delivered on July 10, 1966. The opposite party Abbas Ali then preferred an objection under Order 21, Rule 100, Civil Procedure Code alleging his dispossession and praying for restoration. His claim was allowed by the Civil Judge on July 31, 1967 and possession was restored. Shamsuddin feeling aggrieved by that order, has come up in revision.

3. The learned counsel for the opposite party has raised a preliminary objection to the effect that no revision lies and the remedy of the petitioner was by way of a suit under O. 21. R. 103, Civil P. C. Rule 103 says that any party not being a judgment-debtor against whom an order is made under Rule 101, may institute a suit to establish the right which he claims to the present possession of the property; but, subject to the result of such suit (if any), the order shall be conclusive. I have considered this matter and I am of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document