MODI, J.—This is a plaintiffs second appeal in a suit for damages for wrongful attachment which was partly decreed by the trial court but on appeal dismissed in toto by the learned Civil Judge, Udaipur.

2. It is common ground between the parties that the defendant Amolakchand had obtained a money decree against plaintiff appellant No. 3 Purshottam and in execution of that decree, he applied for attachment of motor bus No.RJY 293 (the previous number being 706) on the allegation that it was the exclusive property of the latter. This application was made on the 16th September, 1952, and attachment was ordered and effected accordingly under O. 21 R. 30 C. P. C. on the next following date, that is the 17th September, 1952. It may be mentioned that this bus was lying at the time in the work-shop of P. W. 2 Bhura-lal, a motor mechanic, as the vehicle needed some repairs. Thereupon, the plaintiff appellant Narainlal raised an objection before the executing court on the 21st October, 1952. That objection has not been brought on this record; but it is admitted before me that his case was that he was a co-owner of the bus to the extent of a half share therein. Defendant Amolakchand admitted t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document