( 1 ) THE question that calls for decision in this case is whether the Court having territorial jurisdiction Over the mortgaged properties could entertain a petition for execution of a decree passed by another Court which ceased to have territorial jurisdiction but which still exists, in the absence of a notification transferring the business or an order under Section 24 or Section 39, C. P. C.

( 2 ) A decree was passed by the Subordinate Judges Court, Guntur, against the appellants in O. S. No. 33 of 1961. Subsequently, execution of this decree levied. Sometime later, a Subordinate Judges Court was established at Narsaraopet and its jurisdiction included the villages in which the properties sought to be proceeded against are situate. Having regard to this fact and notwithstanding the continued existence of the Subordinate Judges Court at Guntur, the decree-holder filed execution petitions giving rise to this appeal, the judgment-debtors formulated an objection that the Court at Narasaraopet had no jurisdiction to entertain the execution petition, as the Subordinate Judges Court, Guntur, continued to exist and no notification was issued transferring the business c