M SELVARAJ Vs. V RAMAMOORTHI NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - There is no substance in this appeal. The appellant is one of the two sons of the judgment debtor, who is the second respondent in the appeal. The third respondent is another son of the second respondent. The appellant preferred a claim petition when the joint family property was attached, on the ground that the debt was incurred for immoral and illegal purposes and it was an avyavaharik debt. The appellant claimed that the debt was not binding on him and share of the property should not be proceeded against by the decree holder. In his evidence, the appellant did not even whisper about the illegality and immorality of the debt.

(2.) THE executing Court found that there was no illegality or immorality vitiating the debt and that the debt was binding on the appellant as it was a debt incurred by his father. Consequently, the executing Court dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellant.

(3.) IT is contended by learned Counsel for the appellant that the purpose for which the debt was incurred was the marriage of the third respondent and that the marriage of a male member of the family will not be a binding necessity on the other coparceners. He relied on the decision of this Court reported in Kathaperumal Pillai v. Rajendran.