1. ' NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.---The dispute in this appeal relates to the land measuring about 21 kanals comprised in Khasra Nos.2, 9 and 12 of Square No,200 in Village Bahawal Garh Autar, Tehsil Lodhran, District Multan. This land was allotted to respondent No,1 Kanni vide order dated 16-5-74 and the question is whether the appellant (Mst. Sufaidi) is in fact, entitled to this land?
2. ' Khasra Nos.2, 9, 10/I, 11, 12 and 20/I Square No,200 were previously allotted to Mangli deceased, the father of Mst. Sufaidi. As in the incomplete Jamabandis received from India, Mangli was not shown as having abandoned any land, the said area was withdrawn from him and allotted on 12-3-1965 to one Ghosi, son of Nathu by the Asstt. Settlement Commissioner. Against the said allotment Hassan Khan filed an appeal in the Court of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner (Land) which was accepted on 19-3-1966. The son of Ghosi namely Sagroo challenged the said order by filing a revision which was decided on 21-2-1973 on the basis of a compromise between Hassan and Sagroo who had colluded between themselves to get the land in question. In the meanwhile, it seems that the complete Jamabandis had arrived showing that Mangli had, indeed, abandoned some land in East Punjab. Consequently, Kanni and Allah Bakhsh, respondents Nos.1 and 2, who are nephews of Mangli deceased, challenged the order dated 21-2-1973 before the Settlement Commissioner, Multan who vide his order dated 3-8-1973 set aside the impugned order dated 21- 2-1973 holding that it was obtained by fraud and collusion. He further directed that the allotment of this area should be made in pursuance of an order of remand which was made earlier on 8-10- 1970 in the proceedings wherein the allotment of the land to the heirs of Mangli deceased was being agitated.
3. ' In pursuance of the said order of remand dated 8-10-1970 the Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Lodhran, vide order dated 20-6-1974, held that the land of Mangli should be cancelled from the name of Hassan Khan etc. And allotted to the heirs of Mangli according to Shariat.
4. ' This should have been the end of the matter but it seems that, in the meanwhile on 16-5-1974, the Khasra Numbers in dispute viz. Khasra Nos.2, 9 and 12 of Square No,200 of Village Bahawal Garh Autar, Tehsil Lodhran, District Multan were allotted to Kanni, respondent No,1. It is this allotment which is now the bone of contention.
5. The case of the appellant before us is that this land having formed part of the original allotment of Mangli deceased, the father of the appellant herein, she was entitled to it, rather than her cousin Kanni respondent. This submission undoubtedly appears to be reasonable and attractive but unfortunately the allotment in favour of Kanni respondent made on 16-5-1974 was not ever specifically challenged by Mst. Sufaidi, daughter of Mangli deceased. Accordingly, even though this allotment in favour of Kanni respondent seems to be unfair but it is not necessarily unwarranted in law because under the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner, Lodhran dated 20-6-1974 the heirs of Mangli were to be given his land in accordance with the Shariat and we are not sure whether Kanni could not get this land as his heir as well. This question could have been settled only if Mst. Sufaidi had challenged the order dated 16-5-74. Not having done so it is not possible to say with any degree of certainty that Kanni respondent is not entitled to the area in dispute. In this uncertain state of affairs we are not inclined to pass any order in the first instance ourselves, on this aspect of the matter.
6. ' The result is that no case for interference with the order of the High Court allowing the disputed land to go to Kanni Khan respondent is made out. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed but with no orders as to costs.