SUSHEELA K.V. Vs. RAMACHANDRAPANICKER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was the Head Mistress of Govt.HSS, Cheruthuruty. E.P.No.111/2011 in O.S.No.31/2008 was filed before the Munsiff Court, Ottappalam by the 1 st respondent, who is a decree holder in that suit to execute the decree against the 2nd respondent, who is the judgment debtor. It is alleged that while the 2 nd respondent was working at the Govt. HSS, Cheruthuruthy, attachment of his salary was sought. The petitioner, as the Head Mistress of the School, was asked to withhold the salary of the 2nd respondent at the rate of Rs.3,919/- per month for a period of 23 months and to deposit the same in the court vide Ext.P1 order dated 22.12.2011. The petitioner did not comply with the order. Rs.4,000/- out of the salary of the 2nd respondent was already under attachment pursuant to an order of the Munisiff Court, Thrissur in O.S.No.1287/2004. There were several other deductions as well. The 2nd respondent had undertaken that he will take suitable steps to get the attachment order waived on making appropriate representation before the Munsiff Court, Ottapalam. The 2nd respondent was also in a habit of creating unpleasant situation in the school, regarding which several complaints lodged with the Deputy Director of Education, Thrissur. Disciplinary actions are also pending against him. Ext.P2 is one such disciplinary proceeding initiated against the 2 nd respondent. It is for this reason that the petitioner could not comply with the orders of attachment. Thereafter, notice was served on her to show cause and appear before the court on 10.08.2012 at 10.30 AM vide Ext.P3. In the meanwhile, the 2 nd respondent got transferred from the Cheruthuruthy School to Govt. HSS, Chelakkara and he was relieved from the post on 09.05.2012 vide Ext.P4. A letter was sent to the Munsiff Court, Ottapalam by the petitioner disclosing these facts on 23.07.2012, a copy of which is Ext.P5. The petitioner being ignorant about the court proceedings was under the bona fide belief that the letter sent to the court intimating the 2 nd respondent's transfer would be sufficient compliance of the show cause notice. The letter received from the Munsiff Court, Ottappalam was also forwarded to SMTHS, Chelakkara vide Ext.P6 letter.

(2.) The petitioner came to know about the order of attachment of her salary only when she was intimated by the Sub Treasury Officer, Wadakkancherry about it.

(3.) It is submitted that the petitioner is residing outside the jurisdiction of the Munsiff Court, Ottappalam and that her salary could not have been ordered to be attached by the Ottapalam court. The petitioner also points out to the procedural irregularities. Order 21, Rule 46B of the Code of Civil Procedure has not been complied with, and the Munsiff Court has directly ordered realisation of the decree debt from the petitioner stating that she is a garnishee liable to pay the amount. No opportunity has been given to explain the circumstances under which the court order could not be complied with.