1. HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.-These 37 certificated appeals arise out of the same judgment of the Lahore High Court delivered in L. P. A. No. 1999/46 on the 16tb November, 1950. The certificates declaring the appeals fit to be admitted for hearing by the Federal Court of Pakistan were granted on the 28th day of November, 1955.
2. The judgment to the L. F. A. Was delivered by Muhammad Munir Chief Justice and Muhammad Sharif J. (as they then were of the Lahore high Court). These appeals, therefore, could not be posted for hearing in this Court because of the difficulty created by the elevation of nosh of the said learned Judges to the Supreme Court and for other reasons until the 17th July, 1954, when the then learned Chief Justice made an enquiry from office to find out as to how many of the then learned Judges of this Court could sit to bear these appeals. Thereafter, due to the pendency of consolidation proceedings, the matter was further delayed.
3. Ultimately on the 8th March, 1965, the consolidation proceedings were stayed pending the disposal of the appeals Then, on the 27th January 1967, the appeals actually came up for hearing when it was pointed out to the Court that in pursuance of an order of the Land Commission under Martial Law Regulation No. 64 of 1959 the names of the appellants had been deleted from the Fard-e- Haqqiat and the respondents were mutated therein as owners in their capacity of Adna Malika. By virtue of the above muta--tions, the respondent claimed that they had become full owners of the subject-matter and the disputes in the appeals had been settled.
4. Faced with this situation, the learned counsel for the appellants made an oral request to withdraw the appeals and seek his remedy, if any, before the Land Commission. Subsequently, however, before the order of the Court could be completed and signed, an application was moved praying that the final decision in the appeals way be postponed to enable the appellants to approach the proper authorities for determining the validity of the muta--tions made in pursuance Martial Law Regulation No. 64 of 1959. The order dismissing the appeals vas, therefore, not signed.
5. The appeals were next fixed for hearing on merits on 6th February, 1967. But, on the 23rd October.
6. 1967, the Court felt that in deciding to bear the appeals on merits the Court was not properly advised and, therefore, it found it proper to adjourn the hearing of the appeals on the 23rd October, 1967, till the final decision of the Land Commission.
7. The final decision of the Chief Land Commissioner in Revision No. 26 of 196-69 was made on the 20th October, 1970. He came to the conclusion that Ala Malkiats had been replaced by the ownership given to the Adna Maliks, but where there are no Adna Maliks, it would still go to. Ala Maliks as Adna Maliks In either case, Ala Malikiata had ceased to exist.
8. The Ala Maliks challenged the correctness of this decision by a writ petition in the High Court being Writ Petition No. 197 of 1971.
9. During the pendency of the writ petition in the High Court the appeals again came up for hearing on the 11th February, 1971, but they were adjourned sine die to await the decision of the High Court in the writ petition. The writ petition was, it appears dismissed in limine on the 1st November, 1971, by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court. No one challenged that decision either in the High Court or in this Court.
10. In the meantime, a number of parties have died. The learned Advocate-on-Record, who originally filed these appeals, also departed from this world.
11. These appeals finally came up for hearing, along with Civil Appeals Nos 13 and 14 of 1951, which also deal with similar disputes between Ala and Adna Maliks. On the 21st May, 1975. The hearing of Appeals Nos. 13 and 14 of 1951 commenced. They were argued on merits for several days but neither the learned counsel nor the present learned Advocate-on-Record for the appellants in these appeals entered appearance in spite of notices.
12. These appeals were called on the 26th May, 1975. The learned counsel for one out of the 309 respondents was present but he too stated that his clients had died and their heirs had not been brought on the record.
13. The learned Assistant Advocate-General has appeared for the Thal Development Authority and the Government of` the Punjab in some of these appeals but we have not felt it necessary to call upon them to argue since the appellants have not appeared to press their appeals. It appears that they are not taking any further interest in these appeals as their names have now bees delete from the Fard-e-Haqqiat by the Land Commission Authorities and that decision has been finally upheld by the High Court.
14. In the circumstances, no useful purpose will be served by keeping these appeals pending any longer. These appeals etc. Accordingly, dismissed for non-prosecution, but having regard to the fact that these appeals have not really been contested, there will be no order as to costs.