CHITTOORY VENKATARAJU Vs. THEMMANA SATHIRAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is a decree-holder, who in execution of a decree for about Rs. 1700, sought to attach an allowance of Rs. 60 a month payable to the judgment-debtor under a will by his father by which he gifted five houses to a choultry with this direction to the trustees. The Subordinate Judge held that the decree-holder was not entitled to attach in execution a right to future maintenance and dismissed the petition with costs.

(2.) A number of decisions have been considered by the Subordinate Judge, which do not appear to have applied and interpreted Section 60(1)(n). Civil P. C. in the same way. The leading decision on this point which has been sought to be applied in cases of this kind is -- 'Rajindra Narain Singh v. Mt. Sundar Bibi', AIR. 1925 PC 116 (A), in which the Privy Council considered an application by a decree-holder for attachment and sale of 16 villages in execution, which the judgment-debtor obtained under the terms of a compromise deed in lieu of his maintenance without power of transfer and during the lifetime of his brother. Their Lordships took the view that the appellant's interest in the villages was a right to future maintenance within Section 60(1)(n), Civil P. C. and, therefore, could not be attached and sold. In that case, they directed a Receiver to be appointed to realise the rents and profits from the lands with a direction to pay from out of the same a sufficient and adequate sum for the maintenance of the judgment-debtor and his family and to apply the balance in liquidation of the decree.

(3.) Some difficulties in interpreting this Privy Council decision were considered in -