B MATHA GOWDER Vs. KADA GOWDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of an application for execution of the decree in O. S. No. 16 of 1947 on the file of the Subordinate Judge of Ootacamund by arrest of the judgment-debtor. The decree was passed in August 1947 and it is stated that the decree-holder has not been able to realise any appreciable sum towards the decree amount. The learned Subordinate Judge finds that the judgment-debtor has the means to pay the decree amount and is therefore liable to be arrested.

(2.) The question that has been argued relates to the correct interpretation to be put upon clause (b) of the proviso to Section 51, Civil P. C. added by means of Section 2. Civil P. O. (Amendment) Act of 1936 (21 of 1936). As it originally stood before the amendment, Section 51 of the Code which was introduced for the first time in 1908 contained only the following provisions:

(3.) According to the first part even at the time the decree is being executed, the judgment-debtor must have in his possession the means acquired by him after the passing of the decree and must neglect or refuse to pay the decree amount. There is no evidence according to the learned counsel of such a state of things. Taking the second part learned counsel contends that the judgment-debtor must have had since the date of the decree the means to pay the amount; in which case, after the passing of the decree the judgment-debtor must have acquired some property which was not in his possession at the time of the execution and therefore he has had the means to pay.