Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J. and Muttusami Ayyar, J.
1. There is no provision in the Procedure Code authorizing the Court to allow a lien for wages on the assets of a judgment-debtor,
2. We are, therefore, reluctantly compelled to vary the order of Judicial Commissioner as regards Rs. 317-9-1, wages due before the appointment of the receiver; but, in other respects, we shall, affirm it.
3. The receiver at first accepted the., services of the respondent and did not vary the terms of her engagement. She is entitled to receive in 'full put of the estate the wages earned by her and the bonus to which she became entitled by reason of her summary dismissal. She is also entitled to be paid the sums expended by her in carrying on the-business under the receiver.' '.'''
4. The order will be varied accordingly, and each party will pay his and her costs of this application.