LAXMI NARAIN Vs. MAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This execution second appeal has been preferred by the decree-holder against the appellate order of the Additional District Judge dated 18th March, 1971, by which the learned Judge affirmed the order of the Subordinate Judge dated 14th August, 1970 upholding the objections of the judgment debtor that the dcarness pay allowed to him by the Government was exempt from attachment in execution of the decree. The appellant obtained a decree for a sum of Rs. 2,720.00 besides costs against the judgment-debtor on 6th March, 1969 and thereafter he took out-execution and proceeded to attach the salary of the judgment-debtor employed in the Electrical and Mechanical Office Workshop of the Government at Safdarjang Airport, New Delhi His basic pay was Rs. 233.00 and dearness pay Rs. 110.00 and Rs 36.00 was dearness allowance. Besides he was getting city compensatory allowance of Rs. 27.44 and house rent allowance of Rs. 51.45 and children allowance of Rs. 50.00, making a total of Rs. 507.89.

(2.) There is no dispute before me relating to the attachment of the basic pay in accordance with the provisions of section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The dispute, however, centres round the fact whether dearness allowance of Rs. 36.00 and dearness pay of Rs. 110.00 per month which had been paid to the judgment-debtor can be attached or were exempt from attachment under clause (L) of the proviso to section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Both the courts below found that they were exempt from attachment.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parlies, I had called upon the respondent to produce the gazette notification declaring the exemption in dispute, but on his failure to do so, I issued notice to the Union of India to appear and contest or support the appeal. Mr. R.L. Tandon has appeared on behalf of the Union of India and has produced the relevant notification before me. the relevant provisions are contained in section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure where all saleable properties belonging to the judgment debtor and over which he has a disposing power are liable to attachment, but a proviso has been inserted exempting certain properties from attachment and sale. Clause (L) of the said proviso reads as follows :-