BELLAMKONDA BUCHI RAMIAH Vs. BELLAMKONDA RUKKAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case has been referred to a Bench by one of us as involving an important question of law relating to the attachment in execution of maintenance order passed under Section 488 Cr. P. C. in favour of 1st defendant against her husband, the 2nd defendant. In execution of the decree the cattle and a cart were attached. The appellant who is the father of the 2nd defendant, filed an .objection petition stating that the cattle and the cart were his self-acquired property and were not liable to attachment and sale under a decree obtained against his son, the 2nd defendant. This objection petition was dismissed. The plaintiff filed the present suit for a declaration that the cattle and the cart were not liable to be attached.

(2.) The 1st defendant resisted the claim of the appellant on the ground that the property in question belonged to the 2nd defendant and so it was rightly attached. The 2nd defendant remained ex parte.

(3.) Necessary issues were framed. Evidence was led by the parties. On the evidence, the trial court dismissed the suit holding that the cattle and the cart were part of the ancestral and joint family property of the appellant and defendant and that it was not the self-acquired property of the appellant. On appeal, the appellate court also took the same view and dismissed the appeal. The plaintiff now has come up in second appeal.