Residential house exemption can cover mixed-use premises where the building remains principally the debtor's home.

A residential house exemption under Section 60(1)(ccc) of the Code of Civil Procedure may apply even where part of the building is used for business, so long as the property remains principally a debtor's settled abode. The court read "residential house" in light of the provision's protective purpose and rejected a narrow construction that would deny relief merely because of mixed use. On the facts, the ground floor's commercial use did not change the building's essential residential character, so the property was not liable to attachment or sale in execution.

---

---

Issues: Whether a building consisting of multiple storeys, with the ground floor used partly for business and the upper floors used for residence, is exempt from attachment or sale as a residential house under Section 60(1)(ccc) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Analysis: The protective object of the relevant exemption provision is to preserve for a debtor one main residential house occupied by him. The expression "residential house" was construed in the setting of the legislative purpose and the ordinary meaning of residence, which may include a dwelling used as a settled abode even though a portion of the same building is used for business. A narrow construction that treats any mixed use as destroying the residential character would defeat the remedial purpose of the provision. On the facts, the house was principally used for residence, and the commercial use of the ground floor did not alter its essential character as the debtors' residential house.

Conclusion: The house was not liable to attachment or sale in execution, and the objection to attachment succeeded.

---