JUDGMENT

1. The respondent, Babu Udit Pershad, holds a decree for a sum of Rs. 61,814 odd against the appellant, Amir Mirza Beg. In execution of that decree he desires to sell through the Civil Court, which passed the decree, one-third share in the following properties as belonging to his judgment-debtor the appellant:

(1) Lands in Malihaband.

(2) Shops and houses in Mirzaganj in the town of Sandila.

(3) A certain number of villages comprised within the taluqa of Aurangabad in the District of Sitapur.

(4) A bungalow in Sitapur.

(5) Shops in Thomsonganj in the city of Sitapur.

(6) A house and certain shops in Giriganj in Sitapur.

2. Against the proceedings in execution of the decree the only objection taken by the judgment-debtor was that the execution of the decree should be transferred to the Collector under the notification of the Local Government, No. 1887-1-238, dated the 7th October, 1911. The notification is incorporated in paragraphs 178 and 179 of the Oudh Civil Digest. The notification is that "the execution of decree in case in which a Civil Court has ordered any ancestral land situated in the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh or any interest in such land to be sold shall be transferred to the Collector." The contention of the judgment-debtor is that the immovable property which the decree-holder desires to sell is ancestral land within the meaning of the notification. This contention has been rejected by the Court below. In appeal before us it is reiterated on behalf of the judgment-debtor.

3. At the hearing of the appeal the appellant's learned pleader abandoned his contention in respect of all properties except the villages comprised within the Aurangabad estate. Our decision therefore must govern the question as to the judgment-debtor's interest in those villages only.

4. According to paragraph 179 of the Oudh Civil Digest the term "ancestral land" in the notification mentioned above means:

(a) Land, forming a mahal or share in or portion of a mahal which has been owned continuously, in Agra from the first of January, 1860, or in Oudh from the summary settlement of 1858-59 or from the conclusion of the first regular settlement, by the proprietor, which term shall include an "under-proprietor" in Oudh as defined in Section 15 of the United Provinces Land Revenue Act, 1901, or by the person or persons from whom such proprietor has directly or indirectly inherited such land;

(b) land forming an estate or part of an estate as defined in the Oudh Estates Act, 1869.

5. In the present case we are not concerned with the Clauses (c) and (d). Those clauses have consequently not been reproduced in this judgment. The argument advanced on behalf of the judgment-debtor is that his one-third interest sought to be sold is ancestral land within the meaning given to it in each of the Clauses (a) and (b). We propose first to dispose of the argument founded on Clause (b).

6. We are of opinion that the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, from whose order this appeal has been preferred, is right in his conclusion that the property in question does not fall within Clause (b). The estate of Aurangabad, within which the villages in question lie, was held as an estate within the definition of that term as given in the Oudh Estates Act I of 1869 by Mirza Agha Jan whose name was entered at No. 77 of the First List and at No. 26 of the Second List of the lists prepared under Section 8 of the Act. He died on the 18th June, 1875 and was succeeded by his eldest surviving son, Muhamad Ali Beg, under a bequest made by him. Agha Jan's eldest son, Nawab Ali Beg, had predeceased him. Nawab Ali Beg's son, Hamid Mirza Beg, had come into existence at the death of Agha Jan and is still alive. Amongst the sons of Agha Jan next to Muhammad Ali Beg in the order of seniority was his son, Ali Mirza Beg. The appellant, Amir Mirza Beg, is the son of Ali Mirza Beg. The youngest son of Agha Jan is Ahmad Mirza Beg. A suit brought by Hamid Mirza Beg against Muham