HURSOOK DASS Vs. KISSORYMOHUN ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Appellants, in a suit brought by them before the Subordinate Judge of the 24-Pergannahs, obtained decree for a debt of Es. 4523 against two persons, who, in these proceedings, are called the Beys, on the 7th of January, 1884. During its dependence, the Appellants made application, in terms of Section 483 of the Civil Procedure Code, for attachment in security of 1900 bales of jute, more or less, then lying in the present Respondent's premises at Chitpore, which they alleged to be the property of one of the Deys, the Defendants in the suit. On the 28th of November, 1883, a perwana was issued, directing the nazir of the Court "to proceed to the spot and make an inventory of the bales of jute actually attached, the same will be identified by Hari Churn Sircar on Plaintiff's behalf."

(2.) THE nazir, in execution of the warrant, proceeded to the Respondent's premises on the 28th of November, and there attached a quantity of jute which was pointed out to him by the Appellants as the property of Borodakant Dey, consisting of 148 bales which the Respondent alleged had been purchased by him from the Beys, and seventy-four bales over which he alleged that they had given him a lien for advances. The Respondent then preferred a claim to the goods attached under Section 278 of the Code, which was disallowed, after inquiry, by the Subordinate Judge, on the l5th of April, 1884.

(3.) THE decree of the Subordinate Judge dismissing the Respondent's claim was not brought under review in these proceedings before the High Court; but the effect of the judgment of the High Court has been to supersede his decree and render it altogether inconclusive. The goods in question were sold in June or July, 1884, by order of the Subordinate Judge, when owing to the intermediate fall in the market, the price obtained for them was about half of what they were worth at the date of the attachment.