Leach, C.J.

1. The question in these appeals is whether the lower Court had the power to order restitution on a petition or whether it should have relegated the petitioner to a regular suit. In O.S. No. 64 of 1934 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Bapatla respondent 1 sued Venkataratnarao and Kamaraju, the minor sons of one Ramakoteswara Rao, for the recovery of a sum of money due by them under the pious obligation rule of Hindu law. He obtained, a decree and attached the judgment-debtors interest in certain properties belonging to the family. An auction was held on 1st December 1936 and the decree-holder purchased the interest of the judgment-debtors for a sum of Rs. 2363, which he paid into Court. The judgment-debtors applied Under Order 21, Rule 90, Civil P.C., for an order setting aside the sale. The application was dismissed because they failed to comply with the requirements of the rule. On 28th September 1937 the sale was confirmed. There were other creditors who had attached the judgment-debtors interest in these properties and they applied for rate able distribution of the Rs. 2363. Their applications were granted and the money was paid out rate ably.

2. Notw