Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1950 Supreme(Cal) 109

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
ROXBURGH, J.
Chief Accounts Officer
Versus
Indra Lull
Civil Rule No. 283 of 1950
Decided On : 02-06-1950

Advocates:
Bhabesh Narayan Bose - for Petitioner; Sanat Kumar Mukherji and Subodh Kumar Bhattacharyya - for Opposite Party.

The court emphasized that the learned Munsif had no power to directly attach the pay of the Chief Accounts Officer and that the garnishee in the case would be the Government, the employer of the judgment-debtor.

Headnote:
Extraordinary Order - Attachment of Pay - The court set aside an extraordinary order directing the attachment of a sum from the pay of the Chief Accounts Officer, holding that the learned Munsif had no power to directly attach the officer's pay.
Fact of the Case:

The Munsif directed the attachment of a sum from the pay of the Chief Accounts Officer in an execution case against a judgment-debtor, an employee of the Railway.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the learned Munsif had no power to directly attach the pay of the Chief Accounts Officer and set aside the order.
Issues: The issue was whether the learned Munsif had the authority to directly attach the pay of the Chief Accounts Officer.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the learned Munsif had no such power and that the garnishee in that case would be the Government, the employer of the judgment-debtor.
Final Decision: The rule was made absolute and the order was set aside, with the petitioner being entitled to costs.

Order. - This is a Rule against an extraordinary order by the Munsif, First Court, Asansol, directing that a sum of Rs. 92-12-0 be attached from the pay of the Chief accounts officer, East Indian Railway, falling due on 1-3-1950, and thereafter from month to month until the final liquidation of the claim in the execution case before him. The execution case was being carried on against a judgment-debtor, E. W. Adams, an employee of the Railway. The learned Munsif holding that his orders under O. 21, R. 48, C. P. C., were not being complied with thought that he could apply the necessary screw on the Chief Accounts Officer by directly attaching that officers pay. Obviously, the learned Munsif has no such power. A faint suggestion was made before me that under O. 21, R. 46 (b), C. P. C., the learned Munsif had such power but even assuming that the rule applied, the garnishee in that case would not be the Chief Accounts Officer but the Government the employer of the judgment-debtor. In no circumstances could the learned Munsif attach directly the pay of the Chief Accounts Officer himself.

2. The result is that the rule is made absolute and the order is set aside. The petitioner, namely, the Chief Accounts Officer, is entitled to his costs.

Rule made absolute.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1950 Supreme(Cal) 109

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTAROXBURGH, J.Chief Accounts OfficerVersusIndra LullCivil Rule No. 283 of 1950Decided On : 02-06-1950

The court emphasized that the learned Munsif had no power to directly attach the pay of the Chief Accounts Officer and that the garnishee in the case would be the Government, the employer of the judgment-debtor.

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
ROXBURGH, J.
Chief Accounts Officer
Versus
Indra Lull
Civil Rule No. 283 of 1950
Decided On : 02-06-1950