Burkitt, J.:— In this appeal, with reference to the reported cases of Koylash Chandra Sliaha v. Christophoridi(1) and Ramzan v. Gerard(2). I, fully concur in the opinion expressed by my brother Aikman in the recent case of Banna Mai v. Jamna Das(3), that when a surety gives the bond prescribed by s. 336 of the Code of Civil Procedure to produce a judgment-debtor before the Court and in order that the judgment-debtor may apply to be declared an insolvent, that engagement is discharged as soon as the judgment-debtor has so appeared, and has applied to be declared an insolvent. It appears, however, that the bond in this case contains a certain other covenant by the surety as to what would happen in case the [39] application to be declared an insolvent were refused. Such covenants in my opinion do not come within the purview of s. 336 and cannot be enforced in the manner prescribed by that section. I therefore dismiss this appeal with costs.
Appeal dismissed.