MYTHILI AMMAL Vs. JANAKI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is against an order made in execution of the decree in O. S. No. 10 of 1924 on the file of the Subordinate Judges Court, Cuddalore. The subject of the petition is a house No. 40, South Car Street, Chidambaram. Mythili, the decree holder was entitled under the decree to recover Rs. 5,800 from her husband Mahadevan, the judgment debtor. To realise this sum she attached the aforesaid house as belonging to her husband. Janaki Ammal, mother of Mahadevan, filed a claim praying that the attachment should be raised on the ground that the house was her own. THIS claim was tried by the learned District Judge, South Arcot, who held that the house did belong to Janaki. Hence this appeal by Mythili, the decree-holder.

(2.) THE learned District Judge chiefly addressed himself to the question whether the purchase money for the house -which was purchased in Janakis name - came out of Mahadevans estate or was furnished by Janaki. He held that, apart from the oral evidence of Janaki, there was no evidence that the purchase money was paid by Janaki out of her own funds but that, on the other hand, there was evidence that it did not come out of the estate of Mahadevan.

(3.) IT is urged upon us that the Income-tax return, inasmuch as it is made in compliance with a notice issued under Section 22(2) of the Income-tax Act, and when made becomes the basis of an assessment made under Section 23, is therefore part of the record of the act of assessment. We do not agree in this view. Section 23 of the Act is :