( 1 ) THIS appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of this High Court involves mainly the question whether an attachment before judgment survives even after an execution petition is filed subsequent to the passing a decree in plaintiff's favour and is later dismissed due to the default of the decree-holder. Facts which are material for the consideration of this appeal are as follows : respondent No. 1's father Daudbhai filed a Civil Suit No. 86 of 1949 for recovery of money, against respondent No. 2 Barkatali. In the course of this suit he obtained an order for attachment before judgment against barkatali and in pursuance of the same, attached one house as belonging to Barkataii on 164-1949. To this attachment the present appellant Hakimuddin objected, contending that the house belonged to him and Barkatali had no saleable interest in it. While the objection proceedings were pending, a decree was passed in favour of Daudbhai on 13-5-1950. Subsequent to this the objection case terminated, partly in favour of the objector and partly in favour of Daudbhai, on 16-8-1950. It was held that Barkatali had saleable interest in only half portion of the house. The remaining half portion

Click Here to Read the rest of this document