The appellant is the first judgment-debtor in execution proceedings taken out by the plaintiff in execution of a maintenance decree she obtained. The decree was against the deceased husband’s joint family, represented by the first defendant, his brother, the second defendant and other family members including the legal representatives of another brother Rudrappa, who died prior to suit.

The decree charged two lots of property, one for maintenance subsequent to suit and the second, B schedule items for arrears of maintenance and provision for pilgrimage, etc. The plaintiff sought in execution to attach some uncharged property in the possession of the first judgment-debtor. The learned Subordinate Judge rejected one of the contentions that the widow should exhaust the charged property first, before resorting to further execution. The view taken by the learned Subordinate Judge is quite correct. It is settled law that a widow cannot be confined to property charged with her maintenance, and that she need not exhaust it all before she can proceed against other property belonging to her husband’s joint family. This has been decided in Srinivasa Iyer v. Lakshmi Ammal1, on which t