STATE OF BIHAR Vs. UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant-State of Bihar has filed this First Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 24.09.1977 passed by the learned 1st Additional Subordinate Judge, Muzaffarpur in Title Suit No.63 of 1965.

(2.) The plaintiff, Chandeshwar Prasad Narain Singh, who was respondent no.1 in this appeal has died and his name has been deleted as his son is already on record as respondent no.3. The original plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit praying for setting aside the order dated 07.07.1964 passed by Execution Court in Misc. Case No.109 of 1961 and further for declaration that the suit properties belonged to the plaintiff.

(3.) The plaintiff claimed the aforesaid relief alleging that the suit properties are the self-acquired properties of the plaintiff and not the ancestral properties. Defendant no.2, Sushil Kumar Singh is his eldest son but he has no right over the property. The defendant no.1, Bank obtained a money decree from the Court of 5th Additional Sub Judge, Nagpur against Sushil Kumar Singh and others and filed Execution Case No.78 of 1959. The plaintiff has nothing to do with the said decree and execution case but the defendant no.1 got attachment issued against the property of the plaintiff. The plaintiff had been Indian Ambassador to Japan till 01.02.1960 and thereafter he is residing in Delhi. He had no knowledge about the attachment. The plaintiff came to know about the attachment on 22.11.1961 and inspected the record and came to know about the fraud committed by the defendant 1st party. The further case of the plaintiff is that the State of Bihar acquired a part of the suit properties to which the plaintiff agreed. At that time, the plaintiff and State of Bihar had no knowledge about the attachment so the plaintiff put the State of Bihar in possession of the property. Since the property belonged to the plaintiff, the same are not liable to be attached in Misc. Case No.109 of 1961 under Order XXI Rule 58. Defendant no.2 had neither any saleable interest in the property nor was in possession.