Key Points: - The protection under Section 60(ccc) CPC is available only to the judgment debtor and not to the legal heirs. (!) (!) (!) - The case held that a residential house inherited by the judgment debtor’s legal representative cannot be exempted from attachment under Section 60(ccc); objections by legal heirs were dismissed. (!) (!) (!) - Jurisprudence cited includes Sikandar Singh v. Harjit-pal Singh, Bikram Singh v. Surjit Singh, Shri K.L. Bawa v. M/s Basant Textiles, Sheela Rani v. Punjab and Sind Bank Ltd., and Rajinder Kaur and Others v. Kashmira Singh and Others to support the personal nature of the protection to the judgment debtor. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - The executing court’s reasoning that the judgment debtor cannot evade liability by attaching the property via Section 60(ccc) when he had executed an agreement to sell; hardship to the decree holder is considered. (!) (!) - The High Court affirmed the lower courts and dismissed the revision petition filed by the legal heirs. (!) (!)

What is the scope of protection under Section 60(ccc) CPC for the main residential house in relation to the judgment debtor and his legal heirs?

What is the effect of a judgment debtor’s execution of an agreement to sell his residential house on the applicability of Section 60(ccc) protection?

What are the precedents and legal principles governing whether the protection under Section 60(ccc) is available to legal heirs of the judgment debtor?