QUEEN Vs. NANDKUMAR BOSE AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We think that the judgment of the lower appellate Court must be reversed. It appears to us that the Judge thinks that the proceedings taken by the representatives of the decree-holder in April 1867 were not bona fide proceedings to keep the decree alive, because they were not (the Judge considers) proceedings directed either against the property or the person of the judgment-debtor. The petitioners are representatives of the original decree-holder. On the 9th April 1867, they applied for execution of their decree, and were directed to prove that they were the representatives of the decree-holder, the deceased Umed Ali.

(2.) On the 26th April 1867, they adduced proof and were admitted to represent the original decree-holder; and on the 30th April the Munsiff struck off the execution case from the file. Now it was impossible for the petitioners to proceed with the execution of the decree until they had established their representative character. This they did, and would probably have proceeded to take further steps, had not the case been thus summarily struck off the file. But be that as it may, we think that under the above circumstances the steps which were taken in the case must be considered as having been taken in good faith to keep the decree alive.

(3.) We therefore reverse the order of the Judge, and restore that of the first Court. The petitioners will obtain their costs of this Court and of the lower appellate Court.