RAJAMMA Vs. GANGAMBIKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER. THIS REVISION UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, ARISES FROM THE ORDER DATED 3-1-1994, WHEREBY EXECUTION OF THE DECREE PASSED AGAINST THE DECEASED husband OF THE PRESENT REVISION-PETITIONER, FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY, THE execution WAS SOUGHT, AND THE COURT BY ITS ORDER DATED 3-1-1994, ISSUED warrant ATTACHING THE SALARY OF THE PRESENT REVISION-PETITIONER. THE DECREE in S. C. NO. 5006 OF 1992 WAS PASSED AGAINST LATE LINGAPPA, WITH interest AT 6 PER CENT THAT IS IN TOTAL A SUM OF RS. 5,140/ -. THE APPLICATION for EXECUTION WHEN IT WAS MADE, THIS ORDER WAS PASSED. THE ORIGINAL judgment-DEBTOR HAD DIED IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER 1992, LEAVING behind THE PETITIONER, TWO DAUGHTERS AND A SON.

(2.) HEIRS HAVE COME UP IN REVISION BEFORE THIS COURT. IT HAS BE ENCONTENDED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER, THAT THE PETITIONER's salary COULD NOT BE ATTACHED IN EXECUTION OF THE DECREE AGAINST HER deceased HUSBAND. THE RESPONDENT's COUNSEL CONTENDED THAT DECREE HAS been PASSED AND THE JUDGMENT-DEHTOR HAVING DIED, THE DECREE HAS TO BE executed AGAINST THE HEIRS.

(3.) I HAVE APPLIED MY MIND TO THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES.