HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4206 OF 2024

ORDER

Heard Sri Y.Yadu Krishna Sainath, learned counsel for the petitioner - Judgment Debtor No.4. Despite service of notice, there is no representation on behalf of respondent No.1 - Decreeholder. Respondent Nos.2 to 5 – J.Dr.Nos.1 to 3 and 5 are not necessary parties and the said fact is mentioned in cause title itself.

2. This revision is filed under Section - 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the order dated 09.07.2024 passed in E.P. No.183 of 2024 in ARB. No.365 of 2021 by the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge at Karimnagar.

3. Respondent No.1 had filed an application under Section 64 of the Chit Fund Act, 1982 before the Chit Arbitrator/Deputy Registrar of Chits at Karimnagar against the petitioner herein and respondent Nos. 2 to 6 herein for recovery of Rs.6,39,125/- with interest at the rate of Rs.18% p.a. from the date of filing of dispute to till the date of realization of the said amount and costs.

4. The Deputy Registrar of Chits at Karimnagar, has passed an award dated 02.12.2023 holding that the petitioner and respondents 2 to 6 herein are jointly and severally liable to pay an amount of Rs.6,39,125/- with interest at 18% p.a. to the 1^st respondent herein., 5. 1^st respondent has filed E.P.No.183 of 2023 in ARB No.365 of 2021 for execution of the aforesaid Award. Learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge at Karimnagar, has issued impugned salary attachment order dated 09.07.2024 directing the Disbursing Officer of the petitioner herein/J.Dr.No.4 i.e. The Executive Engineer, I & CAD, Division No.2 of IFFC-II, LMD Colony, Karimnagar District, to withhold the sum of Rs.9,49,273/- from the monthly salary of the petitioner, and remit the said amount to the account of the aforesaid EP.

6. It is also relevant to note that, learned Executing Court has issued similar orders directing the Disbursing Officer of judgment debtor Nos.5 and 6 to withhold the said amount of Rs.9,49,273/- each from their salaries of J.Dr.Nos.5 and 6 as per Section - 60 of CPC after deducting standard deduction plus one thousand and 2/3^rd of remaining gross salary and shall remit balance 1/3^rd of salary every month from the date of receipt of the warrant.

7. Challenging the said attachment order dated 09.07.2024, the petitioner herein/J.Dr.No.4 filed the present revision.

8. Perusal of the aforesaid salary attachment order dated

09.07.2024 issued by the Executing Court in respect of the petitioner/J.Dr. No.4 would reveal that Executing Court has directed the Disbursing Officer of the petitioner herein to withhold the amount of Rs.9,49,273/-from the salary of the petitioner herein . Learned Executing Court has also passed similar salary attachment orders in respect of J.Dr.5 and 6. Thus, the Executing Court directed all the Disbursing Officers of J.Dr.No.4 - the petitioner herein and respondent Nos.5 and 6 – J.Dr.Nos.5 and 6 herein to deduct and recover an amount of Rs.9,49,273/- each from their salaries. In fact, the aforesaid execution petition was filed by respondent No.1 – D.Hr. to execute the award for recovery of Rs.9,49,273/- from the petitioner herein and respondent Nos.2 to 6. If the Disbursing Officer withhold the said amount and remit to the account of the aforesaid EP, it amounts to recovery of three times of the awarded amount. The same is in violation of the procedure laid down under Contract Act, the Chit Fund Act, 1982 and also the principle laid down by this Court in CRP No.2660 of 2024 dated 18.10.2024. The said aspects were not considered by the Executing Court while issuing impugned salary attachment orders.

9. 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 un