Attachment before sale secures a decree-holder's right to rateable distribution without formal transfer of execution.

A prior attachment of a judgment-debtor's property, effected before its sale and before the receiving court took custody of sale proceeds, establishes a right to rateable distribution of those proceeds without requiring a formal transfer of execution or a fresh application in the receiving forum; the analysis treats the timing of attachment relative to sale and custody as determinative and treats concurrent jurisdiction between courts as not defeating a valid pre-sale attachment. Section 63 Code of Civil Procedure was relevant to the issue of transfer, but the operative effect is entitlement to rateable share where attachment preceded custody.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Simla Banking and Industrial Company Ltd. (petitioner) was entitled to rateable distribution of the sale proceeds of a house sold in execution of a decree obtained by another decree-holder, where the petitioner had caused attachment of the same property before the sale but its execution proceedings were transferred after the Court receiving the sale proceeds.

Analysis: The petitioner had obtained attachment of the judgment-debtor's house on 8th July 1936, prior to the sale in execution of another decree and prior to the receiving of the sale proceeds by that Court. The lower Court treated the courts as of concurrent jurisdiction and held that, because no application for rateable distribution had been made in the receiving Court before the receipt of the assets, the petitioner was not entitled to share rateably. Section 63 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the question of whether transfer of execution was necessary were material to determining entitlement. The facts show attachment by the petitioner occurred before the sale and before the assets were taken into the custody of the receiving Court, making a formal transfer and fresh application unnecessary for asserting a rateable claim.

Conclusion: The petitioner is entitled to rateable distribution; the order denying rateable distribution to the petitioner is set aside and the revision is allowed in favour of the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: A decree-holder who has validly caused attachment of the judgment-debtor's property prior to its sale and prior to the receiving Court taking custody of sale proceeds is entitled to rateable distribution of those proceeds without the need for a formal transfer of execution or a fresh application in the receiving Court.

---