R.P.MOOKERJEE, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal on behalf of the judgment -debtor against a decision by the Subordinate Judge, First Court, Alipore disallowing certain objections raised under Section 47, Civil P. C., read with Section 168A, Bengal Tenancy Act.
(2.) THE judgment -debtor, Nareah Chandra Bose, held a patni under the predecessor -in - interest of the decree -holders opposite parties. For the realisation of arrear patni rent, the landlords obtained three decrees in succession in rent suit No. 2 of 1936 on 2lst December 1936, rent suit No. 12 of 1937 on 9th April 1938 and rent suit No. 16 of 1939 on 17th February 1940. In execution of the last of the three decrees, the defaulting patni was sold on 15th January 1942 and purchased by two of the three decree -holders. The decree -holders auction purchasers sold the patni on 4th April 1944 to one Provash Mallik, All the rent suits bad been brought in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Jessore and the decree -holders applied for the transfer of the decree obtained in rent suit No. 12 of 1937, to the Alipore Court within the district of 24 Parganas. After a certificate had been sent to the Alipore Court on 7th July 1938 the decree -holders levied successive executions. After the decree had been transferred to the Alipore Court and in course of execution case No. 86 of 1938 of the First Court of the Sub -ordinate Judge, Alipore, the decree -holders attached certain properties other than the defaulting tenure, situate in Calcutta and belonging to the judgment -debtors. Subsequently there was an adjustment between the parties on 20th August 1938. It was agreed inter alia that the attachment as effected aforesaid in execution case No. 86 of 1938 would subsist till the entire decretal dues were paid off in installments. After the passing of the Bengal Tenancy Amendment Act, incorporating Section 168A, Bengal Tenancy Act, an -objection was raised on behalf of the judgment. debtor about the legality of the continuance of the attachment above referred to. The learned -Subordinate Judge at Alipore by his order dated 16th April 1943, came to the conclusion that in spite of the sale of the patni in favour of the two out of the three decree -holders there had been no merger and the patni was still in existence and had not either terminated or ceased to exist. Notwithstanding the adjustment, the judgment -debtor was held to be entitled to question the continuance of the attachment. It was further held that the premises attached were not liable to attachment and sale in execution of the rent decree already referred to. The attachment was accordingly withdrawn.
(3.) SUBSEQUENTLY on 1st March 1947 the decree -holders again filed an application in the Alipore Court for execution of the decree in rent suit No. 12 of 1937 passed by the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Jessore. The prayer was in the alternative for attachment of the properties previously released and for the appointment of a Receiver under Section 51(d), Civil P. C. Objections were raised by the judgment -debtor to the effect that under Section 168A, Bengal Tenancy Act, there could be neither any attachment nor could any receiver be appointed in execution. The learned Subordinate Judge overruled the objection and held (1) that Section 168A, Bengal Tenancy Act, did not preclude the decree -holder from levying execution by the appointment of a receiver and (2) the earlier order dated 16th April 1943 withdrawing the attachment then in force could not bar the present application for execution by the appointment of a receiver. The present appeal is directed against this order dated 24th May 1947.;