JUDGMENT

1. Kuar Jang Bahadur, a judgment debtor in various execution proceedings, has instituted four appeals Nos. 29, 30, 42 and 43 of 1924 against certain orders of the Subordinate Judge of Hardoi passed during those execution proceedings. There is a considerable amount of confusion in the appeals because separate orders in separate execution proceedings have not been made the subjects of separate appeals. There are three execution proceedings Nos. 174, 175 and 176 of 1916 pending in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Hardoi and Kuar Jang Bahadur's objections to the continuation of those proceedings were all dismissed, yet appeal No. 29 has been filed with respect to the dismissal of objection in execution case No. 175 of 1916 only. The judgment creditor in all the three execution proceedings is the Bank of Upper India in liquidation. As to appeal No. 30 the mistake is made of filing a joint appeal against two separate decree-holders, Jagat Narain minor and Munshi Lal. Appeals Nos. 29, 42 and 43 raise one single question.

2. We shall consider the facts of the case in which the decree-holder is the Bank of Upper India in liquidation. The decree was passed on 29th April 1916, by