Proceeds from a life insurance policy are exempt from attachment under Section 60(kb) of the CPC, and the decree-holder must prove inheritance of the property from the deceased.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Deepak Gupta, J.

Under Challenge is the order dated 25.02.2000 passed by the Appellate Court of ld. Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali in Civil Appeal No.6 of 2018, dismissing the appeal against the order dated 27.09.2018 of ld. Executing Court, whereby the objections filed by the Judgement Debtors (petitioners herein) in execution case No.183 of 2014, were dismissed.

2. The facts in brief, relevant for the purpose of disposal of this appeal, are that Civil Suit No.1041 of 2004 titled 'State of Punjab through Executive Engineer v. Smt. Daljit Kaur Sodhi and others' for recovery of Rs. 4,42,389/- with interest was decreed by the Court of ld. Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Patiala vide judgment & decree dated 24.07.2007 (Annexure A-1), although it was made clear that recovery of the decretal amount shall be effected from the estate of deceased Harbhajan Singh Sodhi (husband of defendant No. 1 and father of defendants No.2 & 3 - petitioners-JDs herein). In order to realize the decretal amount, execution petition was filed by the decree holder -State of Punjab, during which House No.1790, Phase V, Mohali owned by JD No.1/petitioner Smt. Daljit Kaur Sodhi was attached and the same was sought to be put to auction.

3. The Judgment Debtors filed objections claiming that the house in question was not inherited by them from the estate of late Harbhajan Singh Sodhi and rather, it was the personal property of JD No.1/objector, having been purchased by her vide registered sale deed dated 21.08.2001. However, the objections were initially dismissed on 18.11.2016. In the appeal filed by the Judgment debtors, the Additional District Judge vide his order dated 27.03.2017 set aside the order and remanded the case after framing issues to the effect that as to whether house in question was purchased by objector-Daljit Kaur Sodhi from her own funds; as to whether it was purchased from the money inherited by her from late Harbhajan Singh Sodhi; and as to whether the said house can be attached or sold in the execution of decree in question. After taking evidence produced by the parties, the Executing Court dismissed the objections vide order dated 27.09.2018 and the Appellate Court vide impugned order dated 25.02.2020 upheld the said order of the Executing Court.

4. The short submission made by ld. counsel for the appellants-judgment debtors is that Harbhajan Singh Sodhi, from whose estate the recovery could be effected, had died on 09.03.2001, whereas house in question was purchased by Smt. Daljit Kaur Sodhi vide registered sale deed dated 21.08.2001 for an amount of Rs. 4,95,300/- and that the ownership was ultimately transferred in her name on 19.10.2001. Ld. counsel has also drawn attention towards the fact that as per the evidence brought on record, an amount of Rs. 4,10,630/- was received by Daljit Kaur Sodhi on account of death claim benefit from the Life Insurance Company, after the death of her husband Harbhajan Singh Sodhi and that in case, said amount has been utilized for purchasing the house on 21.08.2001, the same cannot be put on attachment/sale in view of the bar contained in Section 60(kb) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

5. Refuting the aforesaid contention, ld. State counsel for the respondents contends that amount of Rs. 4,10,630/- was received by Smt. Daljit Kaur Sodhi on account of death claim of Harbhajan Singh Sodhi, in whose name the policy existed and so, the same shall be considered to be the estate of the deceased and so, the decretal amount can be realized from the house purchased from that amount.

6. Having considered submissions of both the sides, this Court is of the view that appeal deserves to succeed and the impugned orders passed by the Courts below cannot be sustained.

7. It is not in dispute that as per the decree dated 24.07.2007, the recovery could have been effected by the decree-holder-respondent State from the estate of the deceased Harbhajan Singh Sodhi i.e. predecessor-in-inte