FIRM JADAOCHAND KESHRIMAI Vs. MISHRILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This is a second appeal by the defendant against the judgment of the learned Disrtict Judge, Ujjain passed in Civil First Appeal No. 15-A of 1976 affirming the judgment the decree passed by the trial court in Civil Suit No. 44-A of 1971.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that a suit was filed by plaintiff Mishrilal against the defendant firm M/s. Jadao Chand Keshrimal and Mst. Jamnabai. It is alleged that Jamna Bai had a field bearing 538 situated at village Khedawa, Tahsil Khachrod, District Ujjain. It is alleged that a civil suit was filed before the Small Cause Court by the first M/s. Jadao Chand Keshrimal for recovery of certain amount and therein a decree was passed by the Small Cause Court. It is alleged that this land was purchased by Mishrilal on 19.5.1962. An interim order of attachment was also obtained in the suit before the Small Cause Court by M/s. Jadao Chand Keshrimal (plaintiff therein) on 21.4.1962. A decree was passed in favour of M/s. Jadaochand Keshrimal and in execution of that, an objection was filed by Mishrilal who had purchased the land in question for a sum of Rs. 3,500.00 from Jamnabai. That objection was over-ruled. Therefore, Mishrilal filed the present civil suit challenging the order of attachment passed by the Small Cause Court for declaration of valid title of the land in question. This suit was contested by M/s. Jadaochand Keshrimal. Jamnabai was a formal party in the suit. The question which is essential for disposal of this case was whether a valid attachment notice was issued in the case or not so as to invoke Section 64 of the CPC.

(3.) The learned trial court framed about 11 issues and the relevant issue is issue No. 4 which says whether in Execution Case No. 635 of 1960, M/s. Jadao Chand Keshrimal v. Jamnabai, the attachment notice was a valid notice or not. This issue was decided in favour of the plaintiff and it was held that there was no valid attachment because the notice of that attachment was not displayed on the notice board of the office of Collectorate as per requirement of Order 21, Rule 54 of the CPC. Aggrieved by this order, the defendant filed an appeal before the District Court, Ujjain and the learned District Judge upheld the order of the learned trial court and hence the present second appeal has been filed.