1. Plaintiff, a judgment-debtor, sued for a declaration of his right to certain lands attached by the 2nd defendant and for the setting aside of the summary order passed on the latters claim petition.

2. It is contended, firstly, that only a decree-holder can sue for relief of this nature. It has not, however, been explained how a judgment-debtor is not as directly interested in making a particular portion of his property available for the payment of his debt as the decree-holder is in securing payment from that portion. And, as regards authority, Guruva v. Subbarayudu 13 M. 366 and Muthusamy Mudaly v. Ayyhlu Baihadu 13 M.L.J. 367 are against the appellants contention. The latter case refers to Sardhari Lal v. Ambika Pershad 15 C. 521 : 15 I.A. 123 (P.C) : 5 Sar. P.C.J. 172 : 12 Ind. Jur. 210 as reconcilable with the judgment-debtors right to sue. Authority in this Presidency being in favour of that right, it is unnecessary to deal at length with Kedarnath Chatterji v. Rakihal Das Chatterji 15 C. 674 : 13 Ind. Jur. 104 on which the appellant relies. We find against his contention. As it is open to the judgment-debtor to bring a suit of the nature contemplated in Order XXI, R