JUDGMENT

Allsop, J. - This is a second appeal arising out of execution proceedings. A decree was passed by the Additional Subordinate Judge of Banda on 16th July 1930. The Court of the Additional Judge was abolished on 30th March 1932. Another Additional Judge was appointed on 16th March 1933. The application for execution of the decree of 16th July 1930 was made to the Additional Subordinate Judge. The question before him was whether the decree had been certified. The allegation of the judgment-debtor was that the decree-holder had certified the adjustment of the decree to the Subordinate I Judge on 19th August 1933. The Additional Subordinate Judge held that the certification was of no effect because the Court of the Subordinate Judge was not the proper Court in which the adjustment of the decree should be certified and because the Subordinate Judge had not passed an order recording the adjustment of the decree. He dismissed the objection of the judgment-debtor. On appeal the learned District Judge held that the Additional Subordinate Judge had no jurisdiction in the matter. He also pointed out that it was unnecessary in order that the certification of adjustment should have effect that there should be any specific order by the Court. He allowed the appeal and directed that the application for execution should be returned to the decree-holder for presentation in the proper Court, i.e. the Court of the Subordinate Judge.

3. It is argued here in second appeal that the learned District Judge was wrong in saying that the Additional Subordinate Judge had no jurisdiction to deal with the application for execution because the decree had originally been passed by the Additional Subordinate Judge when there was such an officer posted to that district. It seems to me that the question depends upon the special or general orders which may have been passed under the provisions of Section 13, Sub-section (2), Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act (No. 12 of 1887). An Additional Court is usually only a temporary Court established to enable another Court to dispose of the business before it. There was an Additional Judge in this District up to 30th March 1932. Thereafter there was no Additional Judge. Another Judge was appointed a year later on 15th March 1933. I have examined the notification appointing him and it appears that the local jurisdiction assigned to him by the Local Government under Sub-section 1 of Section 13, Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, was the same as the local jurisdiction assigned to the Subordinate Judge. That being so, the question whether any particular civil business was cognizable by him or by the Subordinate Judge would depend upon orders passed by the District Judge subject to any general or special orders passed by this Court. It cannot be said that the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge created on 15th March 1933 was the same Court as that which existed up to 30th March 1932 and that it was a Court which was conducting business independently of the Court of the Subordinate Judge. Ordinarily, in this province, one would assume that the orders would be that the Additional Court would dispose of business transferred to it by the Subordinate Judge or by the District Judge. That however is a matter of no importance. This Court in second appeal cannot set aside the decree of the lower Appellate Court unless it can be shown that that decree was wrong.

4. Learned Counsel for the appellant has not been able to tell me what orders were passed by the District Judge under the provisions of Sub-section 2, Section 13 or what general orders have been passed by this Court in respect of these matters. That being so, I am not in a position to say that the finding of the learned District Judge in this appeal was wrong. It cannot be said that the execution of all decrees passed by the Additional Subordinate Judge when-ever the Court of Additional Subordinate Judge existed in this district should be executed by an A