OUSEPH XAVIER Vs. CHACKO MICHAYEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is by an attaching creditor of the plaint claim in the suit, whose application under Or. 9, R.9, C.P.C. has been concurrently dismissed by both the courts below.

(2.) Both the Courts were of the view that the petitioner being a stranger could not maintain the application. The fact that he had attached the rights of the plaintiff in the suit did not according to them give the petitioner any locus standi in the matter. Learned counsel says that S.146 and O.22, R.10(1) have been overlooked in this connection and he referred to certain decisions.

(3.) S.146 may no doubt be taken to enable persons claiming under the plaintiff to file the application in question and O.22, R.10(1) may also be taken to admit into the category of such persons, those who have obtained assignment, creation or devolution of any interest during the pendency of a suit in respect of the subject matter involved there. But the question still is whether the attachment as laid by the petitioner has obtained for him any assignment, creation or devolution of interest within the meaning of O.22, R.10(1). If any inference could be drawn in the matter from clause (2) to