Prior attachment prevails over later foreign insolvency adjudication, protecting the attaching creditor's execution rights.

A foreign insolvency adjudication was held not to displace a prior attachment obtained in Madras against the debtor's decree. Applying principles of comity and private international law, the foreign order was treated as an order of a foreign court, but the earlier attachment had already fastened on the subject-matter and created an inchoate yet protected right in favour of the attaching creditor. Assets as at the date of foreign adjudication remained subject to liabilities created by pending execution proceedings, so the foreign receiver could not take the attached decree free of that prior process. The prior attachment therefore prevailed, and execution was permitted.

---

---

Issues: Whether a foreign insolvency adjudication could defeat a prior attachment obtained in the Madras Court against the debtors' decree and thereby displace the attaching creditor's right to execute.

Analysis: The foreign adjudication order was treated as an order of a foreign court for purposes of recognition in British India. The controlling principle was one of comity and private international law, not the internal bankruptcy law of either jurisdiction. A prior attachment, though incomplete, fastens on the subject-matter and gives the creditor an inchoate but valuable right which cannot be interfered with by a later foreign insolvency order. The debtor's assets, as at the date of foreign adjudication, must be taken subject to liabilities already created by pending execution proceedings. Since the attached decree had been earmarked to satisfy the appellant's claim, the foreign receiver could not take it free from that pre-existing process.

Conclusion: The prior attachment prevailed over the subsequent foreign insolvency adjudication, and the appellant was entitled to execute the attached decree.

Ratio Decidendi: A foreign insolvency adjudication does not override a prior attachment already in force in British India, because the attaching creditor acquires an inchoate right protected by private international law and comity.

---