BHAI LAL TANTI Vs. PRABHU SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is directed against an order of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Monghyr, allowing an application under Order 21, Rule 58, Civil Procedure Code, and releasing from attachment the property attached in arc execution case. The property in question is a house, and it had been attached in a previous execution case as well arising out of the same decree. Prabhu Sahu, the opposite party No. 1 before this Court, had filed an application under Order 21, Rule 58, in the previous execution case, and it appears that he had examined a witness in support of his claim. The decree-holder, the present applicant, had also examined a witness in that case, but as on the date to which the case had been adjourned nobody turned up on behalf of the applicant, the case was dismissed for default. The claimant again filed an application under Order 21, Rule 58, and this application has been allowed by the learned Subordinate Judge.

(2.) On behalf of the decree-holder it was contended that as the previous application had been dismissed, the second application with regard to the same property and by the same claimant was not maintainable. It was further urged that the house attached was not the same house which is mentioned in the sale-deed propounded by the claimant. The claimant Prabhu Sahu claimed to be the purchaser of the house under a sale-deed executed by the cousins of the judgment-debtors.

(3.) The learned Subordinate Judge allowed the claim after rejecting both the contentions urged on "behalf of the decree-holder.