Property in the hands of a widow of a deceased judgment-debtor's son is not property of the deceased in the hands of a descendant and is therefore not liable to attachment and sale under section 53 of the C. P. C.

( 1 ) THIS appeal has been brought against the judgment of Mr. Justice Chandra Reddy (as he then was) affirming an order made by the lower appellate Court, refusing execution against the respondent.

( 2 ) THE decree that was sought to be executed was one passed against the respondent in O. S. No. 65 of 1951 on the file of the District Munsifs Court, Tenali. It is unnecessary to enter in to the history of that litigation; it is sufficient to state for the present that the decree was for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1800. 00. against the estate of one Subbaiah alias Prakasam in the hands of the respondent. Subbiah died about twenty five years ago leaving him surviving his son, Siviah, and his widow, Bullemma (respondent ). Siviah died about fifteen years ago and on his death, the respondent succeeded to her sons estate. The plaintiff-appellant applied for attachment of two items of property -- a house and 60 cents of land. The respondent objected to the attachment on a two-fold ground: (1) that she is an agriculturist, that the house is in her occupation and therefore it is exempt both from attachment and sale and (2) that the land could not be attached and sold as it does not belong to that class of property to which the provisions of section 53 of the Code of Civil Procedure are applicable.

( 3 ) THE Court of first instance upheld the respondents objection with regard to the house, and there the appellant allowed the matter to rest. So far as the land is concerned, the first Court negative the objection raised by the respondent. The objection, however, found favour with the lower appellate Court. In A. A. A. O. No. 68 of 1953* Mr. Justice Chandra Reddy, on a construction of the relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, affirmed the decision of the Subordinate Judge.

( 4 ) IT is contended before us that as Sivaiah was liable to pay the debts of this father which were not either immoral or illegal, his property in the hands of the respondent could be reached in the execution of the decree, and that the word descendant in section 53 C. P. C. should receive a wider construction.

( 5 ) NOW the question for decisions whether item 2 sought to be attached by the decree-holder "can be" deemed to be the property of the deceased which has come into the hands of the son or other descendants as his legal representatives with in the meaning of section 53 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

( 6 ) THE answer to this question depends on fsours sections of the Code which it will be convenient to set out.

( 7 ) SECTION 2 (11) defines legal representative as follows:-"legal representative means person who in law represents the estate of a deceased person, and includes anay person who intermeddles with the estate of the deceased and where a party sues or is sued in a representative character, the person on whom the estate devolves on the death of the party so suing or sued". Section 50 provides:-" (1) Where a judgment-debtor dies before the decree has been fully satisfied, the holder of the decree may apply to the Court which passed it to execute the same against the legal representative of the deceased. (2) Where the decree is executed against such legal representative, he shall be liable only to the extent of the property of the deceased which has come to his hands and has not been duly disposed of; and for the purpose of as certaining such liability, the Court executing the decree may, of is own motion or on the application of the decree-holder, compel such legal representative to produce such accounts as it thinks fit". Section 52 reads as follows:-" (1) Where a decree is passed against a party as the legal representative of a deceased person, and the decree is for the payment of money out of the property of the deceased, it may be executed by the attachment and sale of any such property. (2) Where no such orioerty remains in the possession the judgment-debtor and he fails so satisfy the Court that he has duly applied such property