MOTILAL Vs. SONUSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. This appeal arises from execution proceedings in Civil Suit No. 19 of 1926. The appellant was a defendant in the suit as the receiver of an insolvent estate. The decree declared the plaintiff as the owner of the property and ordered the defendant to pay Rs. 320-11-0. In execution the defendant contended that the decree for costs could not be executed personally against him, he having been impleaded in the suit in his capacity as a receiver. The lower Court held that he was personally bound to pay the costs decreed againsu him. The defendant has come up in appeal.

(2.) IT appears to me that the lower Court's order is right. Section 35, Civil P.C., runs as follows: Subject to such conditions and limitations as may be prescribed, and to the provision of any law for the time being in force, the coats of and incident to all suits shall be in the discretion of the Court, and the Court shall have full power to determine by whom or out of what property such costs are to be paid, and to give all necessary directions for this purpose as aforesaid.

(3.) AGAIN in para. 230 it is said: Where a trustee brings or defends an action as a litigant he is as between himself and the other parties to the action like, any other litigant; that is to say, he must pay any debt, damage, or costs which the other litigants recover against him out of his own pocket, and get reimbursement if entitled to it, out of the bankrupt's property.