1. The question raised here relates to attachment of an item of immovable

property. It is said that copy of the order of attachment was not affixed in the

concerned Municipal Office as required by Order XXI R.54(2) of the Civil

Procedure Code. The matter arose in execution and this way: On resistance offered

by the respondents who are purchasers of the property from the judgment-debtor,

after the decree, which was one for money, the appellant who purchased the

property from the decree-holder-auction purchaser applied for delivery of

possession of it after removal of obstruction. Resistance offered was mainly on

the ground that the court-sale was invalid because there was no proper

attachment. The attachment was one made before judgment but made absolute on the

date of the decree. The Subordinate Judge, Trichur, before whom the objection

regarding attachment was raised overruled it but it found favour with the

Additional District Judge, Trichur, who heard the appeal from the order of the

Subordinate Judge.

2. Report of the Amin was that the attachment as ordered was actually effected

and in the face of that the Subordinate Judge was of the opinion that it had to

be presum