HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1637 OF 2025

ORDER

Heard Ms. T. Geeta, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.

N. Amarnath, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

2. This revision is filed challenging attachment of salary warrants dated 11.07.2024 in E.P. No.50 of 2024 of learned IV Additional Junior civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hanamkonda.

3. Respondent No.1 herein is the decree-holder, while the petitioners herein are judgment debtor Nos.3 and 4 in E.P. No.50 of

2024.

4. It is the specific contention of learned counsel for the petitioners - judgment debtor Nos.3 and 4 that the Executing Court without issuing notices, issued warrant of salary attachments, whereas, it is contended by learned counsel for respondent No.1 - decree holder that there is no need to issue notice to the petitioners as the E.P. was filed within two (02) years from the date of Award.

5. It is also the contention of the petitioners that the award is an ex parte award. Learned Arbitrator had passed the award without serving notice on the petitioners and affording them an opportunity.

6. Perusal of record would reveal that respondent No.2 is the chit subscriber for the value of Rs.25.00 lakhs, while the petitioners herein and respondentNos.3 to 5 stood as guarantors. As respondent No.2 committed default in paying the balance chit installments, respondent No.1 filed an application under Section - 64 of the Chit Fund Act, 1982 against the petitioners herein and respondent Nos.2 to 5 for recovery of Rs.13,98,001/- vide AA/CF/No.687 of 2021. Thereafter, vide order dated 18.02.2022, learned Deputy Registrar of Chits, Warangal, allowed the said application with interest @ 18% per annum on Rs.10,73,960/- and costs of Rs.15,525/-. The learned Deputy Registrar of Chits also issued a Recovery Certificate under Section - 71, Rule 55 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982 on the said date. Even then, the petitioners herein and respondent Nos.2 to 5 failed to comply with the said award. Therefore, respondent No.1 had filed an execution petition vide E.P. No.50 of 2024 on 01.02.2024 seeking realization of the awarded amount by way of attachment of salaries against the petitioners herein. Vide order dated 11.07.2024, learned Executing Court issued warrant of salary attachments against the petitioners.

7. With regard to the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that without issuing notices to the petitioners learned Executing Court issued warrant of salary attachments. In view of the same, this Court called for the original record from the Executing Court. Perusal of original record would reveal that the date of award is 18.02.2022 and respondent No.1- decree holder filed E.P. No.50 of 2024 on 01.02.2024. Thus, the decree holder filed the said E.P. within two (02) years of the date of award.

8. It is apt to note that as per Order - XXI, Rule - 22 of CPC, if an execution petition is filed within two (02) years of the date of decree, no notice is required to the judgment debtor, and thereby allows the Executing Court to pass orders for attachment or other steps to execute the decree without delay, preventing unreasonable delays in the execution process. Therefore, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that without issuing notice to the petitioners, learned Executing Court issued warrants of salary attachment is unsustainable. Thus, this Court does not find any error in issuing warrant of salary attachments by learned Executing Court.

9. The other contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioners that the decree holder collected amounts from the chit subscriber, that the interest awarded is on higher side; the decree holder has to proceed against the chit subscriber first etc., do not find any merit to consider at this stage.

10. With regard to the contention of the petitioners that the award is an ex parte award and it was passed without putting the petitioners on notice and without affording them an opportu