Nonnohamy Et Al. V. Podisingho Et Al.,

Present : Ennis and Porter JJ.

 NONNOHAMY et al. v. PODISINGHO et al.

466-D. C. Colombo, 155.

Action by administrator-Action dismissed with costs-Seizure of property belonging to intestate in execution of decree for costs- Must the personal property of (he administrator be discussed before levying execution against (he property of the deceased- Civil Procedure Code, s. 474.

Section 474 of the Civil Procedure Code merely provides an additional remedy against the executor or administrator personally. Where, therefore, an administrator brings an action as administrator, and is ordered to pay costs, the defendant may seize the property of the intestate in execution of his decree for costs.

THE facts are set out in the judgment of the Acting District Judge (K. Balasingham, Esq.):-

This is -an action under section 247 of the Civil Procedure Code. The first defendant brought an action as administrator of one Sanchiappu's estate against second, third, and fourth defendants. The action was dismissed, and he was ordered to pay the costs of the defendants in that case. The words of the decree are "that the said plaintiff do p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document