IMPORTANT POINT
The liability of co-sureties is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor, and execution must consider proportionate recovery from all judgment debtors.

ORDER :

1. Heard Sri Vadlakonda Ravi Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri G. Vasantharayudu, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 and respondent Nos. 2 to 7 are not necessary parties.

2. 1st respondent has filed an application under Section 64 of the Chit Fund Act, 1992 against the petitioner, respondents 2 to 7 herein for recovery of an amount of Rs.12,33,000/-. Learned Deputy Registrar of Chits, Karimnagar, passed an Award in ARC No. 467/2020, dated 23.03.2021 holding that the petitioner, respondents 2 to 7 are jointly and severally liable to pay an amount of Rs.12,33,000/- with interest at 18% p.a. on the principal amount of Rs.11,00,000/- from the date of filing of dispute till realization of the said amount. The said decretal amount is not paid. Therefore, 1st respondent has filed E.P. No. 186 of 2021 in ARC No. 467 of 2020 to realize the said amount from respondent Nos. 2 to 6 including the petitioner herein. Learned Executing Court vide impugned attachment order dated 08.10.2021 ordered for recovery of an amount of Rs.14,43,574/- each.

3. As discussed supra, vide aforesaid Award dated 23.03.2021, learned Deputy Registrar of Chits, Karimnagar, held that both the petitioner and other J.Drs. are jointly and severally liable to pay decretal amount. 1st respondent has filed the aforesaid Execution Petition for recovery of decretal amount from J.Drs. 2 to 6 including the petitioner herein. Therefore, the J.Drs. 2 to 6 including the petitioner herein have to pay the said amount proportionately. Executing Court cannot issue attachment order for realization of entire decretal amount each from the petitioner and other J.Drs. They can recover the said amount proportionately from all the J.Drs. including the petitioner herein. Without considering the said aspects, the Executing Court has issued impugned attachment order to the Disbursement Officer of the petitioner to withheld Rs.14,49,574/- from the salary of the petitioner herein and remit the same to the credit of the aforesaid E.P. Similar attachment orders were issued to the other J.Drs. The petitioner has filed copies of the same. Therefore, the impugned attachment order is contrary to the provisions of the CPC, more particularly, Order XXI and provisions of Contract Act and also principles laid down by this Court in CRP No. 1552 of 2024, dated 12.07.2024.

4. It is relevant to note that Section-36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 deals with ‘enforcement of award’ and the same is relevant for the purpose of considering the lis in the present revisions and it is extracted below:

“Section 36: Enforcement - Where the time for making an application to set aside the arbitral Award under section 34 has expired, or such application having been made, it has been refused, the award shall be enforced under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) in the same manner as if it were a decree of the Court.

(2) Where an application to set aside the arbitral award has been filed in the Court under section 34, the filing of such an application shall not by itself render that award unenforceable, unless the Court grants an order of stay of the operation of the said arbitral award in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3), on a separate application made for that purpose.

(3) Upon filing of an application under sub-section (2) for stay of the operation of the arbitral award, the Court may, subject to such conditions as it may deem fit, grant stay of the operation of such award for reasons to be recorded in writing:

Provided that the Court shall, while considering the application for grant of stay in the case of an arbitral award for payment of money, have due regard to the provisions for grant of stay of a money decree under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).”

5. It is also relevant to extract Order - XXI, Rules - 11 (2), 48 and 48A of the CPC and the same are as under:

“XXI Rule 11 (2) of CPC - Written application - Save as othe