Custodia legis protects tenant's court deposit from attachment until the statutory purpose is fulfilled.

Money deposited by a tenant in court under Section 9 of the Delhi and Ajmer-Merwara Rent Control Act, 1947, to satisfy the statutory condition against ejectment remains in custodia legis while the court controls it for that purpose. Such money is not within the judgment-debtor's disposing power and is therefore not liable to attachment in execution under Section 60 of the Civil Procedure Code until the statutory purpose is exhausted. A contingent benefit to the depositor does not make the fund attachable before that stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether money deposited in court by a tenant under Section 9 of the Delhi and Ajmer-Merwara Rent Control Act, 1947, was liable to attachment in execution of a decree under Section 60 of the Civil Procedure Code.

Analysis: Property or money in custodia legis is not subject to attachment while it remains under court control for the specific purpose for which it is held. A judgment-debtor has no disposing power over such money for his own benefit until that purpose is fulfilled. The deposit made by the tenant was made to satisfy the statutory condition for avoiding ejectment, and it remained under the control of the Court until the condition was worked out. The fact that the depositor might have had a contingent benefit in relation to the deposit did not make the fund attachable before the statutory purpose was exhausted.

Conclusion: The deposited money was not liable to attachment and had to be restored to the Court.

---