D LAKSHMINARAYANA CHOUDARY Vs. VIJAYA PICTURES VIJAYAWADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from the order of the learned Subordinate Judge Chirala made in E. A. Nos. 221 and 235 and 235 of 1971 in O. S. No. 146 of 1967 on 15-10-1971.

(2.) The facts in brief are that there is a money decree passed against a firm of which the appellants are two of the partners. In the execution of the decree certain property of judgment-debtors was attached. The appellants filed E. A. No. 221 of 1971 raising various objections in regard to the attachment and the proclamation of sale issued for he purpose of selling the said property. It is not necessary to detail the various steps taken to put the ;property to sale because nothing turns upon them. The executing Court by the order under appeal held that in view of the fact that the appellants had undertaken not to alienate the property till the entire amount of the decree is paid, the omission to serve them with a prohibitory order as is required under Order 21, Rule 54, Civil P. C. would not vitiate the attachment effected complying with all other requirements of effecting the attachment. It was further found that although the proclamation was not pasted on the notice board of the Collector, the proclamation does not become invalid. It was also found that the appellants were served with notice under Order, 21 , Rule 66 (2), Civil P. C. As a result of these findings the Subordinate Judges , dismissed the application.

(3.) In this appeal Sri B. V. Subbaiah, the learned counsel for the appellants, vehemently argued that although the other requirements of attachment made have been complied with, but when a is required under Order, 21, Rule 54, Civil P. C. the order prohibiting the judgment-debtors from alienating the property attached has not been served upon the appellants, the attachment would be invalid.