RAMLA Vs. GYARSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Civil Second Appeal in a suit filed by the decree-holder under Order 21, rule 63,

(2.) RAMLA had a decree against Chokhla in execution of which he attached the house property in dispute after the judgment-debtor was dead. Gyarsa defendant respondent filed a claim petition under Order 21, Rule 58, C. P. C. claiming the house attached to be his own. This claim petition was allowed on the I4th of July 1955. Thereupon Ramla brought the present suit making Gyarsa and three minor sons Sagra and others of Chokhla judgment-debtor as parties. No proceedings were, however, taken for the appointment of the guardian ad litem of the minors and eventually the suit was dismissed as against the minors. The suit proceeded against Gyarsa alone was dismissed by the Civil Judge, Alwar on 17th of March 1958 on the ground that the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor were necessary parties to the appeal, and as they were not made parties the appeal could not succeed. Ramla has come in Second Appeal in this Court making Gyarsa alone a party to the appeal. He is absent at the time of hearing and the appeal is heard ex parte.

(3.) IT is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the legal representatives of the judgment-debtor were not necessary parties to the suit when the suit was filed by the decree-holder. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on : (i) Ghasi Ram v. Mangal Chand, ILR 28 All 41, (ii) Mst. Maryam Bibi v. Ram Das, AIR 1922 All 404, (iii) Suppan Asari v. Alima Bibi, AIR 1934 mad 587, (iy) Harchandrai v. Gopaldas, AIR 1939 Sind 177, (v) Smt. Radharani Dassi v. Smt. Binodamoyee Dassi, AIR 1942 Cal 92. The lower appellate Court had relied on Maung Khin Gyi v. Rahim Ullah Khan, AIR 1937 Rang 249 in support of his judgment.