THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1685 of 2025

ORDER:

Heard Sri Bathula Rajesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri N. Amarnath, learned counsel appearing for Chit Fund Company/1^st respondent.

2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code challenging salary attachment order dated 09.10.2024 passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Excise)-cum- IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, in E.P.No.263 of 2024 in ARB.No.678 of 2022.

3. Perusal of the record would reveal that 2^nd respondent is the subscriber. Petitioner and Respondent Nos.3 and 4 stood as guarantors to 2^nd respondent. 1^st respondent/Decree Holder, Chit Fund Company, had filed an application, vide ARB.No.678 of 2022, under Section 64 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982 (for short ‘the Act’), before the learned Chit Arbitrator/Deputy Registrar of Chits, at Karimnagar, against petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 4 claiming an amount of Rs.58,210/- along with interest @18% per annum on the principal amount of Rs.47,182/- from the date of filing of dispute till the date of realization. Vide Award dated 05.08.2023, the learned Chit Arbitrator/Deputy Registrar of Chits held that petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 4 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.58,210/- along with interest @18% per annum on the principal amount of Rs.47,182/- from the date of filing of dispute i.e., 01.11.2022 till the date of realization.

4. Thereafter, 1^st respondent had filed an Execution Petition vide E.P.No.263 of 2024 before the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Excise)-cum- IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, for realization of the said awarded amount from petitioner/Judgment Debtor No.3 and respondent No.3/Judgment Debtor No.2 only. Thereupon, the learned Executing Court issued salary attachment order dated

09.10.2024 directing the Disbursing Officer of petitioner/Judgment Debtor No.3 to withheld a sum of Rs.78,435/- from the salary of petitioner and remit the said amount to the account of the said E.P. of the Executing Court. Challenging the said salary attachment order, petitioner filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

5. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that 1^st respondent cannot realize the entire amount of Rs.78,435/- from the salary of petitioner and without considering the said aspect, the learned Executing Court passed the impugned salary attachment order dated 09.10.2024 directing the Disbursing Officer to withheld the aforesaid amount from the salary of petitioner. If recovery is made pursuant to the said salary attachment order, it amounts to recovery of double the awarded amount. Therefore, the same is impermissible.

6. Learned counsel for 1^st respondent, on instructions, would submit that on realization of entire awarded amount from petitioner/Judgment Debtor No.3, 1^st respondent will take steps to terminate the execution proceedings. They will not recover double the awarded amount, as contended by learned counsel for petitioner.

7. Admittedly, against the said Award dated 05.08.2023, petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 4 did not prefer any appeal in terms of Section 70 of the Act. Therefore, the said Award attained finality.

8. It is relevant to note that Section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’), deals with property liable to attachment and sale in execution of decree. Sub-section (1)(i)(ia) of Section 60 of CPC is relevant to the present case and the same is extracted below.

“60. Property liable to attachment and sale in execution of decree .-

1(1) The following property is liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree, namely, lands, houses or other buildings, goods, money, bank-notes, cheques, bills of exchange, hundis, promissory notes, Government securities, bonds or other securities for money, debts, shares in a corporation and, save as hereinafter mentioned, all other saleable property, movable or