MARIAM BEEVI Vs. RAGHAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question raised in this appeal is about the right of the judgment - debtor to pay the decree-debt in instalments in accordance with the provisions of Act XXXI of 1958. The statutory right is there. But the argument advanced on behalf of the decree holder appellant is that the money brought to court as per the order of attachment must be deemed to have become the property of the attaching creditor and hence there is no more scope for any instalment payment. The assumption underlying this argument is not correct. Until an order is made for appropriation of the attached amount, it cannot be deemed to belong to the attaching creditor. No such order has been made in this case and hence the attached amount still remains the property of the judgment - debtor. Until actual appropriation towards the decree debt is made, he continues to be a debtor who is entitled to the benefits available under Act XXXI of 1958. This view is supported by the decision in a similar case reported in 16 TLJ 173. The lower court was therefore right in allowing the debtors petition under Act XXXI of 1958. This appeal fails and it is accordingly dismissed with costs.