JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal on behalf of the judgment-debtors against an order of the District Judge directing execution to proceed against them on the basis of a decree made against their father. It appears that their father was the agent of the respondents and was liable to account for sums of money-received by him. On or about the 21st October 1895, the respondents called upon the father of the appellants to account for all sums received and to produce the amount in his hands in cash. This he failed to do. He thereupon acknowledged liability for the sum of Rs. 3,000 and executed a promissory-note payable on demand. A suit was subsequently brought on this promissory note and a decree obtained against the executant on the 13th November 1900. After the death of the original judgment-debtor, execution has been taken out against his sons, and their defence is that the ancestral property in their hands is not liable to be seized in execution of this decree, because it is based on a debt which must be deemed an illegal for immoral debt. This contention prevailed in the Court of first instance; but upon appeal, the District Judge has negatived it. In support of the present appeal, it h