Judgment :- 1. There was, no direction in the decree regarding the disposal of the money deposited into court by the receiver appointed in the suit, and, except with regard to the amount attached in execution of the decree, the executing court had no jurisdiction in respect of the disposal since that is not a matter relating to the execution, discharge or satisfaction of the decree. The application made by the respondent 1st defendant to the executing court for disbursement to him of the amount left over after satisfying the attachment was misconceived, and the executing court was quite right in dismissing the application presumably on the ground that that was a matter for the trial court which had appointed the receiver. The lower appellant court was wrong in thinking that the executing court could have ordered disposal in exercise of its inherent powers, and, in that view, allowing the respondent's application. (2) I allow this appeal and dismiss the application made by the respondent. I make no order as to costs. Allowed.