Judgement

The facts which gave rise to this appeal were these —

[@ page M.I.A. 606] The Respondent and Appellant had both obtained separate Decrees in respect of arrears of rent due to them respectively by one Gourpershad, deceased. They had both taken out execution of their Decrees after his death, and the Appellant had, at an execution sale, purchased the lands in dispute, against which the "Respondent in this suit sought to execute his Decree, notwithstanding the sale to the Appellant, on the ground that the Appellant had acquired, by his purchase, not the interest of the heir, Hurpersad, the son of Gourpershad, but only the interest of his Widow, Chooharoo Kooer, which really was nothing, and that, therefore, Respondent was entitled to sell in execution of his Decree, the interest of the heir.

It appeared, that on the 11th of November, 1858, the Respondent obtained a Decree against Gourpershad for Rs. 14,636 for arrears of rent, which Decree was affirmed by the Sudder Dewanny

14 M.I.A. 605 ( 1871- 1872) General Manager v. Maharajah Coomar Ramaput Singh 97

Court in 1861. Gourpershad died about that time.

In the year 1862, the then Manager of the Durbhunga Raj brought a suit unde