HARDAYAL SHIVLAL Vs. HAJI ADAM GOOLMAHOMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point for decision in this matter is whether moneys in the hands of the Official Assignee, which are payable to the judgment-debtors as creditors of the insolvent by way of dividend declared by the Official Assignee, are attachable under Order XXI, Rule 52, of the Civil Procedure Code.

(2.) I have been told that there have been judgments of single Judges of this Court disallowing such attachment, following the English cases on the point There is no judgment of a Judge of this Court with reasons given for the decision on the point which might be of some assistance to me in deciding this question The judgments of single Judges, however, are not binding on me.

(3.) Now there is no doubt that in England it has been held that the moneys in the hands of the Official Receiver payable by way of dividend to the judgment-debtor as creditor of the insolvent are not a debt liable to be attached within the meaning of Order XLV, Rule 1, of the Supreme Court Rules. The point was decided in Prout V/s. Gregory (1889) 24 Q.B.D. 281 on appeal from the Order of a Master discharging a garnishea order nisi, referred by a Judge at Chambers to the Court. The judgment of Lord Coleridge C.J. is no doubt based on a broad ground, namely, that to make a garnishee order in such a case would be to interfere with the administration of an estate which has to be administered under the provisions of a statute (Bankruptcy Act 1883, 46 & 47 Vic. c. 52) expressly dealing with the subject-matter, and containing express directions as to the manner in which the subject-matter is to be dealt with.