PAPARAJU VEERARAGHAVAYYA Vs. KILARU KAMALA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that is raised may be stated thus: The purchase was subsequent to the attachment but the agreement in pursuance of which the purchase was made, was prior to the attachment. Does the purchase prevail or not against the attachment?

(2.) The suit in question was filed on the 22nd April, 1933, the application for attachment before judgment was made on the 22nd June, the attachment was ordered on the 24 June and effected on the 13 July. On the 20 June, that is, two days prior to the application for attachment, the defendants executed an agreement in favour of the petitioner agreeing to sell him the property. Relying on this agreement, the petitioner put in a claim petition on the 22nd August and the District Munsif, finding the agreement proved, made the following order on 17 October, 1933: Attachment will continue subject to the rights of the petitioner under the agreement, elated 20 June, 1933.

(3.) The claimant can take no exception to this order, as it upholds such right as he possessed at the time and it follows that C.R.P. No. 788 of 1934 filed impugning that order fails and it is accordingly dismissed but without costs. It is the second order to which I shall presently refer, that has seriously prejudiced the claimant.