' This second appeal arose out of a suit filed by the appellants on the allegations that Mauj Din (deceased) respondent No,1, inherited the suit land under custom and, as such, being a limited owner he was not authorized to alienate the same without consideration and legal necessity. It was claimed that the suit land was ancestral qua them and that the gift made was without necessity and consideration and, as such, was not to affect their reversionary rights. The suit was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge vide judgment and decree dated 13-1-1964 and this decree of dismissal of suit was upheld in appeal by the learned Additional District Judge vide judgment and decree dated 18-3-1965.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants has moved an application (C.M.No,2222-C/84) under Order VI, rule 17, C.P.C. seeking amendment of the plaint so as to claim the property under Muslim Law. It is submitted that fresh and a new cause of action accrues to the appellants in view of the enforcement of Ordinance XIII of 1983. In my view, this Court is not called upon in the present appeal to deal with the assertion whether new cause of action has accrued to the appellants.
Under Ordinance XIII of 1983, all suit or other proceedings of such nature pending in any Court stand abated forthwith. Even the decree, judgment or an order of any Court affirming the right of reversionary under custom has been declared to be void, in executable and of no legal effect to the extent that the said decree, judgment or order is contrary to the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat)
Act. The suit as such stands abated and the appeal resultantly has to be dismissed. Order accordingly. No order as to costs. This also disposes of the Civil Miscellaneous application.