INDER RAJ Vs. PARAS RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a decree-holder's second appeal under sec. 100 read with sec. 47 C. P. C.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the appeal are briefly these: - THE appellant obtained a decree against the respondent for Rs. 1529/- on 22nd May, 1953. An application for execution - of the decree was filed on 19th October, 1954. A house belonging to the judgment-debtor was attached. THEre was however a compromise between the parties on 26th February, 1955 under the terms of which the judgment-debtor agreed to pay the decretal amount in instalments. It was also agreed between the parties that the house shall remain under attachment. THE execution application was dismissed in terms of this compromise. THE judgment-debtor failed to pay the instalments agreed to be paid and |eventually the decree-holder filed a second application for execution on 2nd December, 1955. THE judgment-debtor originally raised some objections alleging payment of certain amounts towards the decree. THEse objections were not successful. Later on, by means of an application, he raised an additional objection on 10th May,1956 that the judgment debtor being an agriculturist, the house is not liable to attachment and sale. THE execution court dismissed the objection holding that the judgment-debtor is not an agriculturist. In an appeal, the Civil Judge, Ganganagar took a different view. He held that the evidence led by the parties clearly proved that the judgment debtor is an agriculturist. He also held that previous compromise, between the parties in which the judgment debtor was given some concession in the form of payment by instalments and under which the judgment-debtor agreed to the continuance of the attachment, did not estop the judgment-debtor from objecting to the attachability and the sale of the property. THE Civil Judge consequently accepted the appeal and allowed the objection. THE decree-holder has come up in second appeal.