Judgment :- 1. The only contention pressed before me is that the decree is not executable against the property which has now rested in the son, the 3rd defendant, by survivorship on the death of his father and that it is a vested right which is not affected by S.53 of the Indian Civil Procedure Code, the decree having been passed before that CPC. came into force in the concerned area. It is settled law that in execution of a decree against the father the son's interest can be sold (AIR 1953 SC. 487 at 490). There is no vested right which can be claimed by the son against execution. S.53 is only a rule of procedure as held by the Supreme Court in AIR. 1952 SC. 170 at 177. The decree has therefore to be executed in accordance with the procedure prescribed from time to time. The son has a right to question the legality of the debt in execution but in the present case he did not do so. The execution of the decree in terms of S.53 is valid. No other point was pressed. This is dismissed with costs.