1. ' MUHAMMAD GUI,. J.-This petition is from the judgment of the High Court dated 9.11-1973, dismissing Writ Petition No, 1477-R of 1966 filed by the petitioners herein. The dispute is about the right of inheritance to one Karam Dad a right-holder who died early in 1953. Mutation of his inheritance entered at No, 51 was attested on 23-4-1953 in favour of his three brothers Ghulam Muhammad, Jagirdar and Mansabdar and sister Mst. Barkate. Ten years later, respondents 1 to 4, sons of Ghulam Muhammad who died in the meantime, filed a time-barred appeal for the exclusion of sons of Mst. Barkate from the inheritance on the ground that their mother had pre-deceased Karamdad and therefore did not succeed to the deceased right-holder under the Muslim Law of Inheritance. The appeal was accepted by Deputy Settlement Commissioner vide order dated 19-4- 1962. On a revision by the sons of Mst. Barkate the case was remanded by the Additional Settlement Commissioner on 20-4-1963 to the Deputy Settlement Commissioner for a fresh decision after hearing all parties concerned in the dispute. On remand, the Deputy Settlement Commissioner after hearing the parties vide order dated 18-10-1963 confirmed the earlier order of D.S. C. Dated 19-4-1962 and the two sons of Mst. Barkate were again excluded from inheritance to the deceased right-holder. It is pertinent to point out that Nisar Ahmad (petitioner No, I herein) who was present in person, on being asked by the D. S. C. To produce evidence in support of his case, expressed his inability to do so. On a further revision by the sons of Mst. Barkate the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner was upheld by the Additional Settlement Commissioner vide order dated 6-2-1965. From the order dismissing the revision it appears that the titiouers in the revision, who are also the petitioners herein, were absent to nevertheless the learned Additional Settlement Commissioner examined he case on merits and found that there was no proof that Karamdad died urging the lifetime of Mst. Barkate and therefore the order of the Deputy settlement Commissioner on remand was not open to any question.
2. ' Aggrieved by the above order the petitioners filed the writ petition Bich was dismissed by a learned Single Judge by means of the impugned rder. The main ground urged by the petitioners in the High Court was that the Deputy Settlement Commissioner after remand of the case disposed t of on 18-10-1963 without affording proper opportunity to the petitioners to prove that Kararn Dad had died during the lifetime of Mst. Barkate. It was suggested that the petitioners herein had no notice of the hearing of the case by the D. S. C. On 18-1U-1963 after its remand by the Additional settlement Commissioner. The learned Single Judge appears to have gone not the matter with care and come to the conclusion that not only the actioners had notice of the hearing but Nisar Ahmed petitioner was present person before the Deputy Settlement Commissioner and on being specially asked to produce evidence in support of his case, he expressed his ability to do so.
3. In support of this petition the petitioners' learned counsel repeated the argument which had been canvassed in but rejected by the High Court. The question whether or not Mst. Barkate survived Karamdad is essentially one f fact which has been decided by the Settlement Authorities against that stationers on the material produced before such authorities. Therefore High court was right to decline to interfere.
4. ' It was also submitted by the petitioners' learned counsel, that the pendants' initial appeal against the mutation order dated 23-4-1953 as hopelessly barred by limitation, and there is nothing to show that e D. S. C. Had condoned the delay. The petitioners have not placed the record a copy of the order of the D. S. C. Dated 19-4-19E4 and in e absence of that order, there is no basis for a plea.
5. In any event point does not seem to have been urged either in the High Court or fore the Settlement Authorities.
6. ' The petition is therefore dismissed.