- (1.) One Shama Sundari sued the judgment-debtor, who is the special appellant before us, for a certain sum of money, and got a decree in her own name on the 6th September 1862. The judgment-debtor appealed to the Judge and during the hearing of that appeal, one Ramkishor Chowdhry was made a co-respondent with Shama Sundari to the extent of an eight-anna share in the money decree. On the 28th May 1864, the Judge, after having made Ramkishor a co-respondent, and thereby a co-plaintiff in the case, dismissed the appeal, naming Ramkishor as one of the judgment-creditors in the decree. Thereupon Ramkishor and Shama Sundari took out a joint execution of this decree; but at a certain time Ramkishor died, and the property of the judgment-debtor was attached by Shama Sundari alone; and this property was about to be sold, when Shama Sundari, on the 6th Chaitra 1274, put in a petition to the effect that she had received the whole amount of the money due on the decree, and the execution proceedings were thereupon stayed.
(2.) On the 25th Aghran 1275, Pyari Mohan Chowdhry, as representative of Ramkishor Chowdhry, sued out execution of the decree to the extent of Ramkishor's eight-anna share in it.
(3.) The first Court considered that the decree had been satisfied by the payment made to Shama Sundari, and refused to allow Pyari Mohan to take out execution proceedings; hut the lower Appellate Court has held that payment to Shama Sundari was not a payment to Pyari Mohan, and has directed that Pyari Mohan be allowed to proceed of the execution of his decree.;