Notice under Order XXI Rule 22 of the CPC is required only if the execution application is filed more than two years after the decree; the subsequent date of issuing an attachment warrant does not trigger this notice requirement.

ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition is filed calling into question the legality and propriety of the salary attachment order dated 22.10.2025 passed in E.P. No. 17 of 2019 in O.S. No. 82 of 2016 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar.

2. Heard Sri Rajesh Bathula, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

3. The principal grievance urged by the petitioner is that the Executing Court, without due consideration of the statutory position, issued a salary attachment warrant without affording an opportunity to the petitioner to offer his explanation. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits, fairly, that there is another attachment warrant already pending against the petitioner and that he is willing to satisfy the decreetal dues after some time. On these grounds, he prays for setting aside the impugned attachment warrant and for appropriate directions.

4. I have perused the material available on record.

5. The primary contention of the petitioner is that the attachment warrant was issued without service of notice. The record, however, discloses that a decree was passed by the trial Court on 08.07.2017 in O.S. No. 82 of 2016, and pursuant thereto, the Execution Petition was filed in March, 2019 seeking attachment of the petitioner’s salary. Nonetheless, the attachment order was passed by the Executing Court on 22.10.2025.

6. Having regard to the relevant dates and the statutory scheme under Order XXI Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which mandates issuance of notice only where an execution application is filed beyond the prescribed two year period, this Court is of the considered view that the contention of the petitioner that the Execution Petition itself was filed beyond time is not borne out by the material on record. The mere date on which the attachment warrant was issued cannot, by itself, attract the requirement of notice under Order XXI Rule 22 CPC. Accordingly, no patent illegality or procedural impropriety is found in the issuance of the attachment warrant by the Executing Court.

7. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the Executing Court for appropriate relief or directions regarding the manner and mode of compliance with the decree, in accordance with law.

8. With the above observation, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.