HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1960 OF 2025

ORAL ORDER

Heard Mr. Bathula Rajesh, learned counsel for the petitioner -

judgment debtor No.5 and Mr. N.Amarnath, learned counsel for respondent No.1- decree holder.

2. This revision is filed under Section - 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the registration of EP and the consequential attachment order dated 05.12.2024 passed in E.P. No.128 of 2022 in Arbitration Case ARB No.18 of 2020 by Principal Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar.

3. Perusal of record would reveal that on the application filed by respondent No.1 vide Arbitration Case ARB No.18 of 2020, the Chit Arbitrator/Deputy Registrar of Chits, Karimnagar, had passed an award dated 30.10.2021 holding that the petitioner herein and respondent Nos.2 to 6 are jointly and severally liable to pay an amount of Rs.8,16,278/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of petition to till the date of realization. They shall also pay Rs.12,920/- towards costs of the arbitration proceedings.

4. Pursuant to the said award, respondent No.1 herein had filed an execution petition vide E.P. No.128 of 2022 in ARB No.18 of 2020 against the petitioner herein and respondent Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6 for recovery of Rs.11,54,582/- from them. Vide the aforesaid order, learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, directed the Disbursing Officer of the petitioner herein to withhold the aforesaid amount from the monthly salary of the petitioner herein/judgment debtor No.5 in the said E.P. Respondent No.2 herein is the chit subscriber, while the petitioner herein and respondent No.3 to 6 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 6. Before passing the order, the Executing Court neither issued notice, nor provided opportunity of hearing.

6. In the light of the said submission, 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 established by