VARKEY VARKEY Vs. AUGUSTHY VARKEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The decree - holder is the appellant. a decree on the following terms was passed on 10th or March 1955:

(2.) It appears to me that the question tor decision depends upon the construction of certain sections of me Code of Civil Procedure and they are S.2(3), 2(11) and 47(3). These are extracted below:

(3.) From the decretal portion extracted above, it is clear, and there can be no doubt that the decree - holder in this case is the second plaintiff and the second plaintiff alone. The questions that can be determined in execution are those specified in S.47, and, if at all, the question that was mooted in the courts below can fall only under sub-section (3) of S.47. Such a question, it seems to me, can arise only on the death of the decree - holder, who, as I said, on a prima facie reading of the decree is me second plaintiff. If the second plaintiff is the decree holder, as long as he is alive, the further question as to who is the representative of the first plaintiff cannot arise in execution.