JUDGMENT

Daniels, J. - This appeal arises out of an insolvency proceeding. The crops in suit were attached by the receiver in insolvency at the instance of the appellant, Niadar, who is a creditor of the estate. The insolvent, Baldeo, is the brother of Mt. Kesar, the recorded proprietor of the property, but it appears that they are not at present on good terms as there has been a criminal case between them. The crops are claimed by the respondent, Ramji Lal, and the District Judge has decided on the evidence that they were sown by him and belonged to him.

2. A preliminary objection is taken that no appeal lies on the ground that a creditor is not a person aggrieved and, therefore, has no right of appeal. The respondent relies on the decision of this Court in Jhabba Lal v. Shib Charan Das (1917) 39 All. 152. This was a decision under the Act of 1907. Under that Act there was a difference of opinion between this Court and the Madras High Court. This Court held that the receiver was the only person who could appeal in such cases, whereas the Madras High Court in Tiruvenkatachariar v. Thangayiammal (1916) 39 Mad. 479 held that an individual creditor was a parson aggrieved and was entitle