Nawal Kishore, J.— This is a plaintiffs appeal against the judgment of the learned District Judge, Jodhpur, holding that the terms of surety bond did not make the surety liable in the execution proceedings. The facts relating to this case are these:—

2. Laxmichand appellant instituted a suit against Rao Raja Gordhansingh for the recovery of Rs. 2,249/- in the Court of Civil Judge, Jodhpur, and on 23rd of February 1949 applied for the issue of a warrant of arrest before judgment against the defendant under Order 38 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code. On 28th of February 1949, a warrant was ordered to be issued accordingly and Gokal Prasad, respondent, stood surety and executed a bond as follows:—

eqdnek eqUntkZ vuoku esa eqnk;ys ds cj f[kykQ gLc vksMZj 38 :y 1 tkjh gqvk vkSj tekur nsus dk gqDe btyklk okyk ls gqvk blfy, eSa eqlEeh xksdyizlkn oYn fkoykyth yMk lkfdu tks/kiqj eqlEeh xksj/kuflag oYn fctSflag eqík;yk dh tekur rknknh :- 22461½ nsrk gwW fd eqnk;ys xksj/kuflag gj iskh ij gkftj jgsxk vkSj u viuh tk;nkn bLrfrLr djsxkA vxj og iskh ij gkftj ugha gqvk ;k tk;nkn bLrfoLr djsxk rks eSa [kqn :- 22461 vnk d:axkA

3. Shortly after the execution of this bond, the parties appear to have come

Click Here to Read the rest of this document