AMARESH CHANDRA SANYAL Vs. ROBINDRA NATH MOITRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A common question fails to be determined in these two cases.

(2.) A. C. Sanyal is the Judgment debtor in both Money Execution Case no. 70 of 1970. The Decree Holder in these two Money Execution Cases filed two applications for execution against a. C. Sanyal with a prayer for his arrest and detention in prison. After some time each of the two decree holders asked for assistance of the executing court for realisation of the decreetal sum by attachment and sale of immovable property of the Judgment debtor, though that prayer was not initially made in any of the two applications for execution. That prayer was allowed when attachment of the two immovable property of the Judgment debtor was made the Decree Holders came to know that the said property was subject to attachment in execution of another decree for a large amount. The decree holders, thereafter, applied again before the executing Court for amendment of his execution application seeking assistance of the Court by attachment and sale of movable property of the decree holder. This prayer in both the money execution cases was objected to by the Judgment Debtor.

(3.) THE Learned Munsif, by his order No. 54 dated 18. 2. 74 in Money execution Case No. 69 of 1970 and by order No. 55 dated 27. 2. 70 in Money execution Case No. 70 of 1970, has allowed the prayer. Challenging these two orders, the Judgment Debtor, A. C. Sanyal, has filed these two Revision applications giving rise to C. R. 1728 of 1974 and C. R. 1841 of 1974. These applications have been filed under section 115 of the Civil Procedure code.