HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1710 OF 2025

ORAL ORDER

Heard Mr. Alluri Divakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner - Judgment Debtor No.2 and Mr. R. Laxmi Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.1 - Decree Holder.

2. This revision is filed under Section - 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the warrant of attachment order dated 24.04.2025 passed in E.P. No.158 of 2024 in ARB No.733 of 2022 issued by learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar.

3. Perusal of record would reveal that on the application filed by respondent No.1 vide ARB No.733 of 2022, the Chit Arbitrator/Deputy Registrar of Chits, Karimnagar, had passed an award dated 31.10.2023 directing the petitioner herein and respondent Nos.2 to 4 to pay an amount of Rs.2,84,381/- along with interest @ 18% per annum on the principal amount of Rs.1,99,472/- from the date of petition till realization and also costs.

4. Pursuant to the said award, respondent No.1 herein had filed an execution petition vide E.P. No.158 of 2024 in ARB No.733 of 2022 against the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein for recovery of Rs.3,43,543/- from them. Vide order dated 16.04.2025, learned Executing Court issued warrant of salary attachment against the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein. Accordingly, on 24.04.2025, learned Executing Court issued salary attachment order directing the Disbursing Officer of the petitioner herein to withhold the aforesaid amount from monthly salary of the petitioner herein, who is judgment debtor No.2 in the said E.P. Respondent No.2 herein is the chit subscriber, while the petitioner and respondent Nos.3 and 4 are the guarantors for the subject chit.

5. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner herein that the Executing Court did not order for proportionate deduction among judgment debtor Nos.1 to 4. Therefore, the impugned order dated 16.04.2025 is illegal.

6. In the light of the aforesaid submissions, it is relevant to extract Order - XXI, Rules - 11 (2), 48 and 48A of the CPC, which are as under:

“XXI Rule 11 (2) of CPC-Written application- Save as otherwise provided by sub-rule(1), every application for the execution of a decree shall be in writing, signed and verified by the applicant or by some other person proved to the satisfaction of the Court to be acquainted with the facts of the case, and shall contain in a tabular form the following particulars, namely-

(a) the number of the suit;

(b) the names of the parties;

(c) the date of the decree;

(d) whether any appeal has been preferred from the decree;

(e) whether any, and (if any) what, payment or other adjustment of the matter in controversy has been made between the parties subsequently to the decree;

(f) whether any, and (if any) what, previous applications have been made for the execution of the decree, the dates of such applications and their results;

(g) the amount with interest (if any) due upon the decree, or other relief granted thereby, together with particulars of any cross-decree, whether passed before or after the date of the decree sought to be executed;

(h) the amount of the costs (if any) awarded;

(i) the name of the person against whom execution of the decree is sought; and (j) the mode in which the assistance of the Court is required whether-

(i) by the delivery of any property specifically decreed;

(ii) by the attachment, or by the attachment and sale, or by the sale without attachment, of any property;

(iii)by the arrest and detention in prison of any person;

(iv) by the appointment of a receiver;

(v) otherwise, as the nature of the relief granted may require.”

“Order XXI Rule 48 of CPC-Attachment of salary or allowances of servant of the Government or railway company or local authority.- (1) Where the property to be attached is the salary or allowances of a servant of the Government or of a servant of a railway company or local authority or of a servant of a corporation engaged in any trade or industry which is establis