JUDGMENT Malik, CJ. - This appeal must be allowed and the case sent back to the lower Court for enquiry as to the amount due under the mortgage dated the 8th of September, 1929, and for the preparation of a fresh decree. There was a mortgage dated the 8th of September, 1929, executed by the landlords-applicants in favour of the Appellants for Rs. 60,000/-. The landlords-applicants applied under the Encumbered Estates Act on the 15th of June, 1935. The papers were, in due course, sent u/s 6 to the Special Judge, first grade, Bijnor. During the pendency of the proceedings in the Court of the learned Special Judge, a suit u/s 33 of the U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act was filed, by the landlords-applicants for accounts, on the 22nd of September, 1938. The mortgagees objected that, by reason of the provisions of Section 7 of the U.P. Encumbered Estates Act, the suit was not maintainable. Relying on the rulings then in force. Sheo Baran Singh v. Ranbir Prasad 1938 A.W.R. (H.C.) 324 and Ranbir Prasad v. Sheobaran Singh 1939 A.W.R. (H.C.) 581 the trial Court decreed the Plaintiff's suit for accounts. Against that decree an appeal was filed before the learned Civil Judge and that appeal was dismissed on the 28th July, 1939 . On the 30th of April, 1940, the learned Special Judge passed a decree u/s 14 on the basis of the declaration given u/s 33 of the U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act and gave the creditors a decree for Rs. 63,153/- in place of Rs. 75,976-4/- claimed by them. This appeal has been filed against that decree. 2. In the year 1942, the Divison Bench rulings were overruled by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Raja Girjesh Bahadur Pal v. Bhagwati Prasad 1941 A.W.R. (Rev.) 1203. This Court held that Section 7 not only bars a creditor from proceeding against a landlord-applicant for recovery of his debt but it also bars the landlord-applicant from filing a suit on the basis of a debt due from him. 3. It is urged by the learned Counsel for the Appellants that even though the decree passed u/s 33 might have become final, the learned Special Judge could not take advantage of that decree and pass a decree on the basis thereof by reason of Clause (c) of Sub-section (4) of Section 14 of the Encumbered Estates Act. 3. It is urged by the learned Counsel for the Appellants that even though the decree passed u/s 33 might have become final, the learned Special Judge could not take advantage of that decree and pass a decree on the basis thereof by reason of Clause (c) of Sub-section (4) of Section 14 of the Encumbered Estates Act. Section 15 of the Encumbered Estates Act provides that: in determining the amount due on the basis of a loan which has been the subject of a decree the Special Judge shall accept the findings of the Court which passed the decree except in so far as they are inconsistent with the provisions of Section 14. 4. Clause (c) of Sub-section (4) of Section 14 provides that the provisions of the United Provinces Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1934, shall not be applicable to proceedings under the Encumbered Estates Act. The provisions of the United Provinces Agriculturists' Relief Act not being applicable to proceedings under the Encumbered Estates Act, to pass a decree u/s 14 on the basis of a decree passed u/s 33 of the U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act would mean nullifying the provisions of that clause and applying the provisions of the U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act to proceedings under the Encumbered Estates Act. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the lower Court should have disregarded the decree passed u/s 33 of the U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act and should have, independently of that decree, passed a decree u/s 14 for the amount that it found due from the landlords-applicants. The point is covered by a recent Full Bench decision of this Court in Rukun Uddin v. Lachmi Narain 1945 A.W.R. (H.C.) 444. 5. The result, therefore, is that the appeal is allowed, the decree of the lower Court is set aside and the case is sent back to that Court to proceed according to law and to pass a decree u/s 14 of the U.P. Encumbered Estates Act. The Appellants are entitled to their costs in this Court.