POONAMCHAND Vs. BASANTILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal arising out of the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Shajapur, in C.O. Suit No. 12 -A of 1964.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are that the ginning factory and the houses in suit, as described in the plaint, are properties situated in Nalkheda. These properties were attached in execution proceedings of a decree in favour of the respondent Basantilal (now dead) who had obtained a money -decree against the respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4. The appellant had filed an objection under Order 21, rule 58, Civil Procedure Code, which was rejected by the executing Court on 13th Match 1963. Against this order, the appellant filed a revision petition before this Court. That revision petition was rejected by the order of this Court dated the 29th November 1963. After the dismissal of the revision petition, the plaintiff appellants filed the present suit on 27th November 1964 under Order 21, rule 63, Civil Procedure Code for a declaration that the properly was not liable to attachment. The trial Court dismissed this suit on a preliminary point of limitation, and so the present first appeal has been filed.

(3.) SECTION 14 of the Limitation Act, as it Stands, clearly provides for exclusion of the time that may be taken in prosecuting with due diligence another civil proceeding and sub -section (2) of section 14 now provides that such proceedings may be in the nature of appeal or revision. Sub -section (2) of section 14 is as under: - -