ALIMUDDIN Vs. GOBIND PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an execution first appeal by the judgment-debtor and is directed against an order made by the Court below by which the value of the property directed to be sold has been assessed at a certain figure for the purpose of being inserted in the sale proclamation that is to be drawn up in pursuance of the provisions of Order 21, Rule 66, of the Civil P.C.

(2.) A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of the appeal on behalf of the respondent that no appeal lies as the order complained of does not amount to a decree within the meaning of Secs.2 and 47 of the Civil P.C., and is not one for which an appeal is provided under Order 43, of the First Schedule to the Code. In support of this objection reliance has been placed on the case of Ajodhia Prasad V/s. Gopi Nath [1917] 39 All. 415.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the appellants maintains that the order is one that comes within the purview of Section 47 of the Civil P.C., and as such, an appeallies against that order and he has placed reliance on the case of Shiam Lal V/s. Roshan Lal [1916] 14 A.L.J. 363. In my opinion the preliminary objection is well founded and must prevail. No doubt the words of Section 47 of the Civil P.C., are very wide and as was pointed out in the case of Mukhtar Ahmad V/s. Muqarrab Hussain [1912] 34 All. 530 if taken in their literal sense will cover every order of an interlocutory nature that may be passed in execution proceedings. But that does not Seem to have been the intention of the Legislature.