Judgment

RAY, C. J.:- These six appeals are by certificate from the judgment dated 23 January, 1968 of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in C. M. A. Nos. 210 and 374 of 1967 in that High Court.

2. Two questions arise for decision in these appeals. First whether in the circumstances of the case, there was any property of the Hyderabad Co-operative Commercial Corporation Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the Co-operative Society which could be attached by the decree-holders, the appellants in Civil Appeal No. 1708 of 1969 and Civil Appeal No. 2539 of 1969 in the hands of the Director of Civil Supplies. Second, whether the dissolution of the Hyderabad Cooperative Commercial Corporation Ltd. by the Registrar, of Co-operative Societies was competent.

2A. Syed Mohiuddin Khadri. hereinafter referred to as the decree holder, obtained on 14 August, 1951 a decree from the City Civil Court Hyderabad, against the Co-operative Society for a sum of Rs. 6, 91,293. 11 Ps. with interest.

3. On 23 November, 1959, the decree-holder filed an Execution Petition before the City Civil Court against the Co-operative Society for attachment inter alia of a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- belonging to the Cooperative Society and in the custody of the Commissioner of Civil Supplies and the Accountant General, Hyderabad. On 27 November, 1959, the City Civil Court issued a prohibitory order to the Commissioner of Civil Supplies to hold the said sum until further orders. Pursuant to the order, on 2. December, 1959, the Accountant General wrote to the Commissioner of Civil Supplies that in view of the order of the Court, no payment relating to the Co-operative Society would be made by his office without the concurrence of the Court. The decree-holder contended that the attachment is valid. The State contends that there was no debt due to the Co-operative Society and therefore, there was no valid attachment.

4. The facts and circumstances under which the City Civil Court made an order for attachment are these. The State budget for 1959-60 provides for payment of Rupees, 4,50,000/- to the Co-operative Society. In the Execution Application the decree-holder stated that the sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- mentioned in the budget was a debt due to the Co-operative Society. The decree-holder further alleged that the sum of Rupees 4,50,000/- belonging to the Co-operative Society was in the custody and control of the Commissioner of Civil Supplies and the Accountant General, Hyderabad as evidenced by the budget provision and a letter dated 12 June,1959 issued by the Commissioner of Civil Supplies to the District Treasury Officers. The letter dated 12 June, 1959 written by the Assistant Chief Accounts Officer and approved by the Commissioner and addressed to District Treasury Officers stated that:

"The following provisions for the Civil Supplies Department are made under the above major head (meaning thereby Trading Civil Supplies) in the budget estimates for the year 1959-60; (1) payment to Hyderabad Co-operative Commercial Corporation Rs. 4,50,000/- ............ You are requested to kindly make the payments under the above heads as per rules and intimate to this office the full particulars of the amounts and expenditure incurred in your district every fortnight on the 5th and 20th of the succeeding month to which they relate for watching the expenditure as a whole against the above provision".

5. The City Civil Court on these facts issued aprohibitory order on 27 November, 1959 directing the Commissioner of Civil Supplies to hold the sum until further orders. The Accountant General, pursuant to the said prohibitory order, wrote to the Court on 2 December, 1959 that no payment relating to the Co-operative Society would be made by his office without the concurrence of the Court.

6. The High Court held that the mere fact that the Commissioner of Civil Supplies directed the Treasury Officer to make payments to the Co-operative Society as and when occasion arose did not mean that the