valid, and the defect in jurisdiction could not be cured by the production of a written authority in the Court of Appeal. Shivaram Vithal v. Bagirthibhai. Bom. H. C. R., VI. 20. (v) Broughton gives a Mss. case-Allen v. Remington, Nov. 17, 1865-where a defendant signed a writ, drew his pen through the signature, saying he had been wrongly described, and Norman, J., held service sufficiently proved. The N.-W. P. High Court direct that when ever the Civil Courts in these Provinces, may have occasion to sell in execution of a decree or other order, any house, or other building liable for the demand, situated within the limits of a military cantonment or station, they shall, on confirming the sale, forward a copy of the Bill of Sale to the Commanding Officer of such cantonment or station, for his information, and for record in the Brigade or other proper office. C. O., N.W. P., 19. CHAPTER XXXIII. Circuitus est evitandus. INTERPLEAD, i. e., contest inter se their respective claims, so that the Court may adjudge to whom such debt, duty, or other thing belongs, in order that the plaintiff may be indemnified. This is a chapter new to the Code; it provides for the relief of one whose only interest in property is that of a stake-holder in property which two or more persons claim adversely to one another. Such person, when he wishes to obtain a decision as to whom the property is to be delivered, and to indemnify himself, can institute a suit against all claimants, provided no suit is pending in which the rights of all such parties can be properly decided. The plaint must, in addition to its usual contents, state (i) absence of any interest save that of stake-holder in the thing claimed; (ii) claims made by defendants severally; (iii) absence of collusion between plaintiff and any of defendants. If the thing claimed can be put into Court's custody, plaintiff must do so before he can be entitled to any order in the suit. At first hearing, Court may declare plaintiff discharged from all liability, award him his costs, and dismiss him; or, if justice or convenience require, retain all parties till disposal, and, if it find admissions of parties or other evidence enable it, adjudicate title to thing clamed, or direct defendants to interplead one another by filing statements entering into evidence. Nothing herein enables agents to sue their principals, or tenants their landlords, for the purpose of compelling them to interplead with persons other than those making claim through such principals or landlords. On institution of suit, Court may provide for plaintiff's costs by giving him a charge on thing claimed or otherwise. If the stake-holder is being actually sued by one of the defendants in respect of the subject-matter of an interpleader suit, the Court in which such suit is pending shall, on being informed by the Court which passed the decree in the interpleader suit in favour of the stake-holder, stay proceedings as against the latter, and provide for his costs so far, but if, and so far as they are not provided for, they may be added to the costs in the interpleader suit. *S. 152. +S. 218. Act I. 1872, Ss. 17-23, 31, 58, & 70. § Act IX, 1872, Ss. 182, &c. (a) that the plaintiff has no interest in the thing claimed otherwise than as a mere stake-holder; (b) the claims made by the defendants severally; and (c) that there is no collusion between the plaintiff and any of the defendants. M. 472. Payment of thing claimed into Court. When the thing claimed is capable of being paid into Court or placed in the custody of the Court, the plaintiff must so pay or place it before he order in the suit. can be entitled to any Procedure at first hearing. M. 473. At the first hearing the Court may (a) declare that the plaintiff is discharged from all liability to the defendants in respect of the thing claimed, award him his †costs, and dismiss him from the suit: or, if it thinks that justice or convenience so require, (b) retain all parties until the final disposal of the suit: and if it finds that the admissions of the parties or other evidence enable it, (c) adjudicate the title to the thing claimed; or else it may (d) direct the defendants to interplead one another by filing statements and entering into evidence for the purpose of bringing their respective claims before the Court. M. 474. Nothing in this chapter shall be taken to enable Sagents to sue their principals, or tenants to sue their landlords, for the purpose of compelling them to interplead with any persons other than persons making claim through such principals or landlords, When agents and tenants may institute interpleader suits. Illustrations. (a) A. deposits a box of jewels with B., as his agent. C. alleges that the jewels were wrongfully obtained from him by A, and claims them from B. B. cannot institute an interpleader- suit against A. and C. (b) A. deposits a box of jewels with B., as his agent. He then writes to C. for the purpose of making the jewels a security for a debt due from himself to C. A. afterwards alleges that C.'s debt is satisfied, and C. alleges the contrary. Both claim the jewels from B. B. may institute an interpleader suit against A. and C. M. 475. When the suit is properly instituted, the Court may provide for the plaintiff's costs by giving him a charge on the thing claimed or in some other effectual Charge of plaintiff's costs. ་ Procedure where a defendant is suing stake-holder. way. M, 476. If any of the defendants in an interpleader suit is actually suing the stakeholder in respect of the subject of such suit, the Court in which the suit against the stake-holder is pending shall, on being duly informed by the Court which passed the decree in the interpleader suit in favour of the stake-holder, that *S#. 194 197. Costs. such decree has been passed, stay the proceedings as against him; and his costs in the suit so stayed may be provided for in such suit, but if and so far as they are not provided for in that suit, they may be added to his costs incurred in the interpleader suit. PART IV. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES. CHAPTER XXXIV. OF ARREST AND ATTACHMENT BEFORE JUDGMENT. M. 477. (74, 80) If at any stage of any suit other than When plaintiff may apply that security be taken, that the defendant, with intent to avoid or delay the plaintiff, or to avoid any process of the Court, or to obstruct or delay the execution of any decree that may be passed against him, (w) (a) has absconded or left the jurisdiction of the Court, or (b) is about to abscond or to leave the jurisdiction of the Court, or (c) has disposed of or removed from the jurisdiction of the Court his property or any part thereof, or that the defendant is about to leave British India (x) under circumstances affording reasonable probability that the plaintiff will or may thereby be obstructed or delayed in the execution of any decree that may be passed against the defendant in the suit, the plaintiff may apply to the Court that security be taken for the appearance of the defendant to answer any decree that may be passed against him in the suit. Order to bring up defendant to show cause why he should not give security. M. 478. (75, 80) If the Court, after examining the applicant, and making such further investigation as it thinks fit, is satisfied that the defendant, with any such intent as aforesaid, (a) has absconded or left the jurisdiction of the Court, or (b) is about to abscond or to leave the jurisdiction of the Court, or (c) has disposed of or removed from the jurisdiction of the Court his property or any part thereof, or that the defendant is about to leave British India under the circumstances last aforesaid, CHAPTER XXXIV. Actus legis nemini est damnosus. A PLAINTIFF at any stage in any suit save one for the possession of immovable property can apply on affidavit for security to answer decree to be taken from defendant, who, he can show, has, with intent to avoid or delay or obstruct plaintiff or execution, (i) absconded, or left Court's jurisdiction, (¿¿) is about to do so, (ii) has disposed or removed from Court's jurisdiction his property or any part thereof, or (ir) is about to leave British India under circumstances which make such delay, &c., probable. If after examination Court is satisfied as to any of the above allegations, it may issue an order to bring defendant before it, to show cause why he should not give such security. If he fail to show cause, Court may order him to deposit money sufficient to answer claim against him, or to give security for his appearance at any time when called upon while suit is pend ing and until satisfaction of decree. In default of such appearance surety shall bind himself to pay any sum of money defendant may be ordered to pay in the suit. Such surety may at any time apply for discharge, and on such application, Court shall summon defendant, or may in first instance issue warrant of arrest. On his appearance, Court shall discharge surety and order defendant to find fresh security. If defendant fail to comply with any order for security, Court may commit him to jail until decision, or, if judgment be given against him, until execution. No one, however, shall be in any case imprisoned more than six months, or six weeks, if subject-matter do not exceed Rs. 500. Rules for subsistence allowance of judgment-debtor apply here also. In the same way attachment of property before judgment can be applied for, save that the allegation of absconding can no longer be urged and a new one of having quitted jurisdiction leaving property behind him is added. The application shall, unless the Court otherwise direct, specify property to be attached and its estimated value. The Court after examining allegations, &c., as before, may require defendant either to furnish security, in such sum as may be specified in the order, for producing and placing at Court's disposal such property or portion thereof, or its value, whenever required, or to appear and show cause why he should not furnish it. Meanwhile conditional attachment prayed for may be granted. If defendant fail to show cause or to furnish security, the property or necessary portion of it shall be attached. But if he do not so fail, Court shall order attachment, if issued, to be withdrawn; these attachments are to be carried out as if for money decrees and claims to them investigated in the same way. Whenever required security with security for attachment-costs is furnished, attachment shall be withdrawn. Such attachment does not affect rights existing prior to it nor bar any decree-holder from applying for its sale. In the event of decree, it is not necessary to re-attach property thus under attachment. If it appear that arrest or attachment was obtained on insufficient grounds, or suit of plaintiff fails and no probable ground for it appears, Court may, on defendant's application, award compensation not exceeding Rs. 1,000 for damage or injury caused, but not more than it might decree in a suit for compensation. Awards under this section bar any subsequent suit for compensation. n) A creditor is not entitled, merely because he has a just demand against his debtor to move the Court to put in force these extraordinary processes against him; he is bound to prove the exceptional circumstances which alone entitle him to ask for their being put in force. Goutiere v. R. Emile, N. W. P., I. 32 ; and the ap 36 plication must be founded on strong evidence. Teenaram v. Ramruttan Hyde, II., 181. (x) There need be no intent proved when defendant is about to leave to return to India. Agra Bank v. Minto, In. Jur. (N. S.) I. 265. |