RAMAN Vs. AMBUJAKSHI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal by the decree holder the question for decision is, whether in execution the sale of item 1 of the properties in the schedule of the decree can be allowed to take place. The decree comprised two items of properties and was based on a compromise, which made both of them liable for the satisfaction of the amount of the decree and to which the second defendant, though interested in item 1, was not a signatory. At first, the sale of item 2 was held, but was afterwards set aside on the ground, that there was no saleable interest in it. Subsequently, on an execution petition dated Vrischigom 21, 1125, for the sale of item 1, notice was served on the parties interested including the second defendant, and no objection being taken to it, the execution Court on Vrischigom 30, 1125, ordered execution to proceed against that item on Makarom 11, 1125, the second defendant filed an objection to execution, in which the validity of the decree as against him based on the compromise which was not signed by him, was not taken. He also applied for review of the earlier order allowing execution against item 1. His prayer was rejected and an appeal preferred by him did not meet with success and was dismissed on March 18, 1953. The decree holder then took steps to execute the decree against item 1, when he was met by the present objection by the second defendant, that the decree is not valid or binding on him. The execution Court dismissed the objection, but on appeal the Subordinate Judge allowed it.