H. N. TILHARI, J. ( 1 ) HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER. THIS REVISION UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, ARISES FROM THE ORDER DATED 3-1-1994, WHEREBY EXECUTION OF THE DECREE PASSED AGAINST THE DECEASED husband OF THE PRESENT REVISION-PETITIONER, FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY, THE execution WAS SOUGHT, AND THE COURT BY ITS ORDER DATED 3-1-1994, ISSUED warrant ATTACHING THE SALARY OF THE PRESENT REVISION-PETITIONER. THE DECREE in S. C. NO. 5006 OF 1992 WAS PASSED AGAINST LATE LINGAPPA, WITH interest AT 6 PER CENT THAT IS IN TOTAL A SUM OF RS. 5,140/ -. THE APPLICATION for EXECUTION WHEN IT WAS MADE, THIS ORDER WAS PASSED. THE ORIGINAL judgment-DEBTOR HAD DIED IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER 1992, LEAVING behind THE PETITIONER, TWO DAUGHTERS AND A SON. ( 2 ) HEIRS HAVE COME UP IN REVISION BEFORE THIS COURT. IT HAS BE ENCONTENDED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER, THAT THE PETITIONER's salary COULD NOT BE ATTACHED IN EXECUTION OF THE DECREE AGAINST HER deceased HUSBAND. THE RESPONDENT's COUNSEL CONTENDED THAT DECREE HAS been PASSED AND THE JUDGMENT-DEHTOR HAVING DIED, THE DECREE HAS TO BE executed AGAINST THE HEIRS. ( 3 ) I HAVE APPLIED MY MIND TO THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES. ( 4 ) IF THE JUDGMENT-DEBTOR DIED BEFORE THE DECREE IS FULLY SATISFIED, THEPROVISION OF LAW AS TO HOW THE DECREE IS TO BE EXECUTED IS CONTAINED IN section 50 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. SECTION 50 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, READS AS UNDER. "50. LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE. (1) WHERE A JUDGMENT-DEBTOR dies BEFORE THE DECREE HAS BEEN FULLY SATISFIED, THE HOLDER OF THE decree MAY APPLY TO THE COURT WHICH PASSED IT TO EXECUTE THE SAME against THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DECEASED. (2) WHERE THE DECREE IS EXECUTED AGAINST SUCH LEGAL representative, HE SHALL BE LIABLE ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF THE PROPERTY of THE DECEASED WHICH HAS COME TO HIS HANDS AND HAS NOT BEEN duly DISPOSED OF; AND, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASCERTAINING SUCH liability, THE COURT EXECUTING THE DECREE MAY, OF ITS OWN MOTION OR on THE APPLICATION OF THE DECREE-HOLDER, COMPEL SUCH LEGAL representative TO PRODUCE SUCH ACCOUNTS AS IT THINKS FIT". ( 5 ) A READING OF THIS SECTION PER SE REVEALS THAT DECREE IS EXECUTABLE AGAINST LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES ONLY, TO THE EXTENT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE DECEASED IF ANY, WHICH HAS COME IN THE HANDS OF HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES and THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN DISPOSED OF EARLIER BY THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES. IF ANY PROPERTY HAS ALREADY BEEN DISPOSED OF BY THE HEIRS before THE EXECUTION OF DECREE, THEN, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT PERSONAL decree CAN BE EXECUTED PERSONALLY AGAINST THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES, OR that HIS PERSONAL PROPERTY OR PERSONAL SALARY IS TO BE ATTACHED AGAINST the JUDGMENT-DEBTOR. THIS CONCLUSION EMERGES FROM THE PERUSAL OF SECTION 50, sub-SECTION (2) OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, SECTION 52 ALSO provides FOR ENFORCEMENT OF DECREE AGAINST LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE. IT reads. "52. ENFORCEMENT OF DECREE AGAINST LEGAL representative. (1) WHERE A DECREE IS PASSED AGAINST A PARTY AS the LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF A DECEASED PERSON, AND THE DECREE IS FOR the PAYMENT OF MONEY OUT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE DECEASED, IT MAY BE executed BY THE ATTACHMENT AND SALE OF ANY SUCH PROPERTY. (2) WHERE NO SUCH PROPERTY REMAINS IN THE POSSESSION OF THE judgment-DEBTOR AND HE FAILS TO SATISFY THE COURT THAT HE HAS DULY applied SUCH PROPERTY OF THE DECEASED AS IS PROVED TO HAVE COME into HIS POSSESSION, THE DECREE MAY BE EXECUTED AGAINST THE judgment-DEBTOR TO THE EXTENT OF THE PROPERTY IN RESPECT OF WHICH he HAS FAILED SO TO SATISFY THE COURT IN THE SAME MANNER AS IF THE decree HAD BEEN AGAINST HIM PERSONALLY". ( 6 ) THEREFORE, IT COMES OUT THAT NO PERSONAL PROPERTY OF THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES IS TO BE MADE SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE EXECUTION OF DECREE PASSED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT-DEBTOR. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE SALARY OF the REVISION-PETITIONER 1, WHO IS THE WIDOW OF THE JUDGMENT-DEBTOR HAS been ATTACHED. SALARY OF A PERSON IS PERSONAL EARNING AND PERSONAL PROPERTY. SO IT IS THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF THE REVISION-PETITIONER AND IT cannot BE SAID TO BE THE PROPERTY OF THE HUSBAND IN THE HANDS OF THE legal REPRESENTATIVES. SO IT CANNOT BE ATTACHED. AS SUCH THE ORDER OF attachment OF SALARY DATED 3-1-1994, APPEARS TO BE WITHOUT JURISDICTION. THE REVISION AS SUCH IS ALLOWED. THE ORDER DATED 3-1-1994 IS SET ASIDE. SO IT CANNOT BE ATTACHED. AS SUCH THE ORDER OF attachment OF SALARY DATED 3-1-1994, APPEARS TO BE WITHOUT JURISDICTION. THE REVISION AS SUCH IS ALLOWED. THE ORDER DATED 3-1-1994 IS SET ASIDE. BUT IT IS KEPT OPEN TO THE DECREE-HOLDER TO APPLY FOR EXECUTION OF DECREE which MAY BE EXECUTED ONLY AGAINST THE PROPERTY OF THE JUDGMENT-DEBTOR, if ANY, IN THE HANDS OF THE HEIRS. THE REVISION IS THUS FINALLY DISPOSED OF AS ALLOWED. COSTS MADE EASY. --- *** --- .