JUDGMENT Ramachandra Iyer, C.J.- This appeal arises from an order of the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Vellore, declining to excuse the delay in the presentation of an application by the Government as representing an evacuee, for payment out of certain moneys; under section 42 of the Estates Abolition Act. A sum of money was deposited with the Tribunal as advance compensation. One Sheriff Mohammed was the landholder. He was indebted to one Shazadi Begum who has migrated to Pakistan and is an evacuee within the meaning of Central Act XXXI of 1950. Under section 8 of that enactment, all properties declared to be evacuee property under section 7 shall be deemed to have vested in the Custodian for the State. The liability of Sheriff Mohammed to Shazadi Begum can certainly be taken to be an evacuee property which vested in the Government. Unfortunately, the Government representing the Custodian of Evacuee Property, did not apply within six months, from the date, on which the compensation amount was deposited, for payment out under the provisions of section 42. Long thereafter, it filed an application for the purpose, and also applied for excusing the delay in making the application. The Tribunal has rejected the application on the ground that it bad no power to excuse the delay on the part of a representative of the creditor. The terms of section 42 itself make it clear that the power to condone the delay was limited. Sub- section (2) says that every claim against the compensation which is not made to the Tribunal within the time aforesaid shall cease to be enforceable. The effect of this provision will be that the claim of the creditor, viz., Shazadi Begum, whose interests have now vested in the Government, had ceased to be enforceable after the lapse of time by reason of the provisions of section 42. The section also states that the remedy against the compensation amount alone had ceased to be enforceable. Therefore the denial of payment out of compensation amount will not preclude the Custodian or the Government from proceeding against the debtor under the appropriate provision of the law. We are of opinion that the view taken by the Tribunal that it had no jurisdiction in the circumstances of the case to excuse the delay and direct payment of the amount under section 42 to the Government representing the interests of the evacuee is correct. We are of opinion that the view taken by the Tribunal that it had no jurisdiction in the circumstances of the case to excuse the delay and direct payment of the amount under section 42 to the Government representing the interests of the evacuee is correct. The appeal fails and is dismissed.. There will be no order as to costs. Before concluding, we must express our obligation to Mr. R. Ramachandran, who appeared as amicus curiae for the fourth respondent, on whose behalf no appearance had been entered in this Court. K.L.B.-----Appeal dismissed.