UNION OF INDIA Vs. RADHA KISSAN AGARWALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) G. W. Browne was an employee of the East India Railway and was a subscriber to tile State Railway Provident Fund. He elected to be governed by the Provident Fund Sterling Accounts Rules, whereunder payment of the provident fund credited in his account in rupees was on retirement to be made in sterling. On August 26, 1947, Browne addressed a letter to the Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer, East India Railway, requesting that the provident fund payable to him on retirement may be remitted to him by Bank Draft on the District Bank, water Street, Liverpool. After Browne retired from service, the Deputy General Manager, Eastern Railway, wrote a letter on July 27, 1955, to the Chief Accounts Officer, communicating the sanction of the General Manager for payment of the special contribution to provident fund to Browne in sterling in terms of Rule 1410 (1) of the Railway Establishment Code. Another communication was received from browne (who had apparently by then migrated to the United Kingdom) on February 22, 1956, by which he requested that the amount standing to his credit in the Provident Fund Account be remitted to the Westminster Bank, Birmingham. The Railway Administration then drew two cheques - one for Rs. 14,428-8-9 and another for Rs. 23,018-11-10 in favour of the Reserve Bank of India with instructions to the Reserve Bank to convert the amounts covered by the cheques into sterling and to transmit the fun in sterling to the bankers of Browne in England.

(2.) The respondent Radha Kissen Agarwalla had obtained a money decree against Browne and he applied to the 3rd Court of the Subordinate Judge at Alipore for execution of that decree, and obtained an order for attachment of the cheques lying with the Reserve Bank. The cheques were attached and under orders of the executing Court the cheques were encashed and the amount realized was deposited in the executing Court.

(3.) The Union of India claimed immunity from attachment of the cheques on the ground that they represented provident fund money which by Section 3 of the Provident Funds Act, 1925, was immune from attachment. The execution application filed by Radha Kissen Agarwalla was struck o on December 7, 1956. On the next day Radha Kissen Agarwalla started another execution application and applied for and obtained an order for attachment of the money lying in the executing Court in the execution case which had been struck off. The Union of India again applied for removal of attachment on the ground that the money represented provident fund money and was immune from attachment under the law and that the attachment was "illegal and without Jurisdiction" The executing Court overruled the objection observing "that the attachment issued by the Court on December 8, 1956, was perfectly in order. * * * the moneys attached by the Court lost their character as Provident Fund moneys long before they were attached and hence they were not immune from attachment, as claimed by the objector". The Union of India then applied to the High Court of Calcutta in revision. The High Court confirmed the order passed by the executing Court.