JUDGMENT

R.N. Gurtu, J. - This is an appeal of Akhara Panchaiti Kalan Udasian, who were defendant in the suit. The suit was filed under the following circumstances, as will appear from the plaint: One Lala Har Prasad was the owner of property. Before he died, he executed a mortgage deed for Rs. 6,0001- with interest at the rate of -|10|-per cent. per month in favour of the defendant Akhara on the 21st of January, 1928. After the death of Lala Har Prasad, his two widows Smt. Chandrawati and Smt. Mokhani became his heirs to the estate and acquired a life interest therein and entered into possession of the property. The two widows aforesaid in the month of May, 1935, made an application under the Encumbered Estates Act in the court of the Second Special Judge, Saharanpur, to secure liquidation of their thus band's debt. Thereafter Smt. Mokhani died in the month of September, 1935, and the name of defendant no. 3, namely, Smt. Bishan Devi, a daughter of Lala Har Prasad was entered in place of Smt. Mokhani in the suit under the Encumbered Estates Act. In the Encumbered Estates Act proceedings the mortgage of 1928 was shown and the property in village Bhawapur, pargana Jwalapur, mentioned in Schedule A of the present plaint was shown as hypothecated under the aforesaid mortgage deed. Besides the said property, Lala Har Prasad had left other properties, movable and immovable, and they are entered in Schedule B of the present plaint and they form part of his estate and were also shown in the Encumbered Estates proceedings.

2. We may here mention that by mistake-an item of property was entered in the present Schedule B which should have been shown in Schedule A, because it was part of the property mortgaged under the mortgage deed referred to above.

3. In the Encumbered Estate, Act proceedings a simple money decree was passed in respect of the mortgage debt in favour of the Akhara and thereafter the decree was transmitted to the Collector for liquidation along with a list of the properties liable for attachment, sale or mortgage in satisfaction of the debt. This was done under Sec. 19 of the U. P. Encumbered Estates Act and non-mortgaged property of Lala Har Prasad was also included in the list.

4. Then the present suit was filed by Smt. Bimlawati Devi, a daughter of Har Prasad, as a reversioner. She alleges in the plaint that Smt. Chandrawati and Smt. Mokhani were illiterate woman and therefore they wrongly showed the entire property movable and immovable, and not only the mortgaged property of Har Prasad as being property which would be available for attachment, sale or mortgage in satisfaction of his debts. The plaintiff's case was that she was not a party to the Encumbered Estates Act proceedings and she was a minor when the proceedings were instituted, and that since she had attained majority now and had come to know of the proceedings therefore in order to protect her interest she was filing the suit. She claimed the following relief:-

"A. By means of a decree it may be declared that the property mentioned in Schedule B of the plaint is not liable for payment of any debt of defendant no. 1, in connection with the proceedings in suit No. 183|51 of 1935 under the Encumbered Estates Act of the court of the Second Special Judge, Saharanpur, (Smt. Chandrawati and others applicants) , which is pending decision in the court of the Iqbal Officer, Roorkee, for liquidation, nor is the said property liable to transfer, nor is such a transfer binding upon the plaintiff after the death of Smt. Chandrawati defendant no. 2."

5. In this way by her plaint she sought a declaration in respect of all other properties, except the mortgaged property.

6. The Akhara entered defence and raised various pleas and one of the pleas was that the entire property of Har Prasad had rightly been shown in the list of properties as available for attachment, sale or mortgage in satisfaction of the debt, as it was Har Prasad's debt which was to be satisfied out of the