1. I see nothing in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, which affects S.62 of the Cochin Nayar Act by which this case is governed, except to the extent to which that section says that the interest of a member of an undivided tarwad in the tarwad property is not heritable. Nor do I see how, even if I am prepared to subscribe to it, the proposition stated on the authority of Muneswari v. Jagal Mohini (AIR. 1952 Calcutta 368) that "an attachment of an undivided share of a member of a Mitakshara Joint family during his lifetime operates as a division of interest and causes a severance of status" can be of any assistance to the appellant decree-holder seeing that the question we have to consider is not what would be the effect of such an attachment if made, but whether such an attachment can be made at all having regard to what S.62 of the Cochin Nayar Act and S.60 of the Civil Procedure Code say.

2. S.62 of the Cochin Nayar Act runs thus:

"62. Until partition, no member of the tarwad shall be deemed to have a definite share in the tarwad property liable to be seized in execution nor shall such member be deemed to have any alienable or heritable interest therein."

The provisions of