JUDGMENT

1. This is a plaintiffs first appeal arising out of a suit brought by them in the Court of the Civil Judge, Lucknow, for a declaration that the property in suit is liable to be attached and sold in execution of their decree and that the defendants have no right or title to the property. The property consists of a two-thirds share in a kothi situated in China Bazar, Lucknow. This kothi and some other property was owned by one Hamid Ali Khan, a Shia Mahomedan, who died in September 1918 leaving as his heirs his widow, Kaniz Sughra Begam, his sister Mt. Salimunnissa and his brother Nawab Ali Khan. A dower debt of Rs. 25,000 was due to Kaniz Sughra Begam and as a childless Shia widow she was entitled to a one-fourth share in the moveables and in the materials of the houses left by her husband. She sold both her dower debt and her one-fourth share in the inheritance of her husband to the plaintiffs and some others. The transferees filed two suits against Nawab Ali Khan and Mt. Salimunnissa, one in respect of the dower debt purchased by them, and the other for partition of the one-fourth share of Kaniz Sughra Begam in the property of Hamid Ali Khan. The suit for dower was decreed on 24th May 1922 and though Nawab Ali Khan appealed against the decree, the appeal was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court on 12th May 1926 (Ex. 3). The suit for partition was dismissed by the trial Court but it was eventually decreed by the High Court and the final decree for partition was passed on 29th January 1931, (Ex. 4). On 5th March 1925, Nawab Ali Khan mortgaged a two-thirds share in the site of the kothi in question and a moiety share in the materials to one Nawab Saiyid Ali Khan for Rs. 8000, (Ex. 9). Nawab Saiyid Ali Khan sued on his mortgage and obtained a preliminary decree on 7th August 1929. The decree was made absolute on 8th March 1930 and on 6th August 1930, Saiyid Ali Khan sold this decree to Chaudhri Mohammad Jamil, who is now represented by the defendants-respondents. Chaudhri Mohammad Jamil put the decree purchased by him in execution and purchased the property himself. Sub. sequently the plaintiffs-appellants attached the property in suit in execution of their dower decree. The defendants objected under Order 21, Rule 58, Civil P.C., and their objections were allowed. Thereupon the plaintiffs brought the suit which has given rise to this appeal mainly on the grounds that Saiyid Ali Khan and Chaudhri Mohammad Jamil took the transfers with full knowledge of the plaintiffs' claim and the decrees made in their favour and that the transfer made by Nawab Ali Khan in favour of Nawab Saiyid Ali Khan was with the intention of defrauding his creditors particularly the plaintiffs. The suit was contested by the defendants, the heirs of Chaudhri Mohammad Jamil, and on the defence put up by them the following issues were framed by the learned Civil Judge:

1. Are the transfers in favour of Nawab Saiyid Ali Khan and Chaudhri Mohammad Jamil invalid having been made during the pendency of the partition and dower suits?

2. Was the transfer made by Nawab Ali Khan made with intent to defraud the plaintiffs or their transferees' claim?

3. Are the defendants or their predecessors-in-interest transferees in good faith and for consideration ?

4. Does the order dated 18th May 1935, operate as res judicata between the parties ?

5. To what relief are the plaintiffs entitled?

2. Issue 1 was decided by the learned Civil Judge in the negative holding that the doctrine of lis pendens did not apply to the case. The objection on which issue 2 was framed was not pressed before the trial Court so no finding was recorded on that issue. The learned Civil Judge did not also consider it necessary to decide issue 3 as the plaintiffs had given up their plea of the transfer having been made with intent to defraud them. Issue 4 was framed on the defendant's plea that if the property in suit be held to have been subject to a charge in favour of the plaintiffs, the ord