Sharma, J.—This is an appeal against the appellate order of the learned Additional district Judge, and arises under the following circumstances.

2. The respondent Nand Kishore filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 600/- and odd against Lachminarain and applied for attachment of certain immovable property. The Court issued a notice and ordered a warrant of attachment of the miiovable peoperty indicated by the decree holder in his application and further ordered that the attachment be not made if the defendant furnishes sufficient security for the decretal amount. A warrant of attachment was made over to the Nazir of the court who reached the spot and found the judgment debtor Lachminarain with certain gold ornaments on. He wanted to attach this property, but after some consultation a surety bond was executed by Pannalal indicating that in case of decree being passed he would pay the decretal amount together with costs. This surety bond was executed on the 15th February, 1947, when the Nazir had gone to the spot for attachment. The case of the decree holder is that this surety bond after execution was handed over by the surety to the Nazir, whereupon, he did not proceed to attach the p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document