HIRALAL CHOUDHARY Vs. HARIRAM KHETAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the judgment-debtor.

(2.) It appears that the respondent obtained a money decree, in execution of which he sought to attach different articles, including 50 pairs of dhotis and 100 pairs of saris. The judgment-debtor took an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, hereinafter referred to as the "Code" that these items constituted "wearing apparel" and were, therefore, exempt from attachment under Section 60 of the Code. The learned Munsif exempted some articles other than these. On appeal the learned District Judge dismissed the appeal with an observation that the Nazir or the peon will not attach any used wearing apparel. Hence the Present appeal.

(3.) The only point raised by learned counsel appearing for the appellant is that the fifty pairs of dhotis and 100 pairs of saris are wearing apparel within the meaning of the term as used in Section 60 of the Code and ought to have been exempted. There is force in this contention.