MUKHTIARA Vs. SARDARNI VIRPAL KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code is direct-ed against the order of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Pattala, dated 4th July, 1966, whereby he dismissed the appellant-judgment-debtors objections to the attachment of Rs. 15,000 out of the compensation payable to the appellant Mukhtiara alias Mukhtiar Chand under the Land Acquisition Act in respect of the appellant's property that was acquired by the Punjab State Electricity Board.

(2.) TO appreciate the points arising for decision in this appeal, it is necessary to refer to the circumstances in which the decree against the appellant was passed. The appellant Mukhtiara is the elder brother of Choranji Lal. They jointly owned some land in village Badungar, district Patiala. By means of a registered sale deed, dated 17th May, 1960, Choranji Lal sold quite a large area of land out of Shamilat Patti Bhara Band Nihala in village Badungar to the respondent decree holders Sardarni Virpal Kaur and others for Rs. 15,000. About a month later, on 16th June, 1960, Choranji Lal executed a gift in favour of the appellant, his elder brother, whereby he transferred his half share out of 15 bighas 17 biswas of land comprised of Khasra Nos. 465, 483 467 and 485, situate in village Badungar. Subsequently, on discovering that Choranji Lal had no title or interest in the property which had been sold to them on 17th May. 1960, the respondents Shrimati Virpal Kaur and others brought a suit for recovery of Rs. 15,000, alleging that the subsequent sift made in favour of the appellant Mukhtiar Chand was with a view to defeat their right to recover the amount from Choranji Lal. The appellant Mukhtiar Chand, who was also impleaded as a defendant in that suit, contested his liability and defended the gift inter alia on the plea that out of the property gifted to him only 1 Bigha 7 Biswas of land belonged to Choranji Lal and the rest was already owned by him (Mukhtiar Chand ). The trial of suit resulted in a decree against both the defendants, but Mukhtiar Chand was not held to be personally liable. The operative part of the judgment of the trial Court, Exhibit J. D. 1, which is consistent with the decree dated 26th March, 1964 was in these words:" i decree the plaintiff's suit for the recovery of Rs. 15,000 against the defendants with costs. Mukhtiar Chand would be liable to refund the decretal amount to the extent of the property received by him from Choranji Lal which was owned by that vendor on 17th May 1960. "

(3.) OUT of the various fields which had been Rifted by Choranji Lal to Mukhtiar Chand appellant on 16th June, 1960, Khasra Nos. 465 483 and 467 measuring 3 bighas 7 biswas 4 bighas 6 biswas and 5 bighas 4 biswas, respectively, were acquired by the Punjab State Electricity Board. This acquisition included half share of the land which was owned by Mukhtiar Chand before the gift was made in his favour. The total compensation payable in respect of these fields was assessed at Rs. 38,550. Alleging that one half of this amount was for acquisition of Choranji Lal's share in Khasra Nos. 465, 483 and 467 that had been gifted to Mukhtiar Chand, the decree holders Shrimati Virpal Kaur and others applied for its attachment to the extent of the amount payable to them under the decree, dated 26th March, 1964. This was, however, objected to by the appellant Mukhtiar Chand on the following grounds: