V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE revision petitioner is the judgment debtor. The respondent filed a suit, O. S. No 194/70 on the file of the 3rd Additional District Munsif s court, Kakinada, which was decreed. Thereafter he filed E. P. No. 299/82 in the same Court for recovery of the decretal amount by attaching the salary of the petitioner. The petitioner was working as a Staff Correspondent of the Indian express Limited, Madurai, his disbursing officer being at Vijayawada. The executing Court allowed the E. P. , by ordering attachment of the petitioner s salary subject to the provisions of section 60 of the Civil Procedure Code. Aggrieved by the caid order of attachment, the present revision is filed.

( 2 ) THE main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per Order 21 Rule 48-A of the Code of Civil Procedure the order of attachment under revision is without jurisdiction since the disbursing officer of the petitioner at Vijayawada is beyond the local limits of the executing Court s jurisdiction. To appreciate this contention it is necessary to look into Order 21 Rules 48 and 48-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. Order 21 Rule 48 is as follows:"43. Attachment of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document