S.N. Katju, J. - (1.) THESE are two connected appeals which arise out of proceedings in execution of a decree passed in favour of Phool Chand in suit No. 242 of 1953 of the court of Munsif Koil, district Aligarh.
(2.) ONE Mohan Lal has two sons --Udai Ram and Maya Ram. Udai Ram's son was Ram Prasad who was married to Smt. Sharbati. Their sons are Lalit Kishore and Durga Dutt. Maya Ram's son is Shiam Manohar. Phool Chand who is the appellant in the two appeals before me instituted the aforesaid suit No. 242 of 1953 for recovery of Rs. 2535.00 together with interest etc. from Durga Dutt. It was alleged that the latter had borrowed money from Phool Chand and hence the claim against Durga Dutt. The aforesaid suit was decreed. The defendant in that suit was described as "Durga Dutt son of Sri Ram Prasad, caste Maithil Brahman, resident of Pala Sahibabad, Pargana and Tahsil Koil, district Aligarh, Proprietor of R. S. Sharma and Company, Aligarh". Suit No. 73 of 1959 was brought by Phool Chand against Lalit Kishore, Smt. Shar-bati, Shiam Manohar and Durga Dutt. It was stated therein that after the passing of the aforesaid decree in suit no. 242 of 1953 against Durga Dutt the plaintiff got attached the house and shop in dispute. Objections under Order 21, Rule 58 C. P. C. were raised by Lalit Kishore, Smt. Sharbati and Shiam Manohar on the ground that they had a 5/6th interest in the said house and the shop and their aforesaid interest could not be attached and sold in execution of the decree in suit No. 242 of 1953. The plaintiff Phool Chand sought a declaration by suit No. 73 of 1959 that the aforesaid house and the shop were liable to be attached and sold in execution of the aforesaid decree in suit No. 242 of 1953 which had been passed in his favour. Suit No. 401 of 1958 was instituted by Lalit Kishore, Smt. Sharbati and Shiam Manohar against Phool Chand and Durga Dutt in which they prayed that their 5/6th interest in the aforesaid house and shop was not liable to be attached and sold in execution of the decree in suit No. 242 of 1953 which had been passed in favour of Phool Chand.
(3.) THE trial court decreed suit No. 401 of 1958 and dismissed suit no. 73 of 1959. Aggrieved from the decision in the two suits Phool Chand preferred appeals before the lower appellate court. Both the appeals were dismissed by it. Phool Chand has now preferred second appeal in this Court. When the appeals came before me earlier I remitted the following issue to the court below for its finding thereon:- - "Whether Shiam Manohar, Ram Prasad, Durga Dutt and Lalit Kishore were members of a joint Hindu family and whether Shiam Kishore had an interest in the properties purchased by Ram Prasad and Durga Dutt by the sale deeds of 1940?" The court below found that Shiam Manohar was not a member of the joint family with Ram Prasad and his sons. It has further found that Shiam. Manohar had no interest in the properties pur- chased in the name of Ram Prasad and Durga Dutt by the sale deeds of 1940.;