METTUR INDUSTRIES LTD Vs. VELAYUTHA MUDALIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two civil revision petitions raise a common point which I shall make clear by reference to the facts of the case.

(2.) VELAYUTHA Mudaliar, the respondent 1 herein, filed a suit, O. S. No. 871 of 1957, on the file of the District Munsif's Court, Salem, for recovery of a certain amount due from Palani Goundan, the respondent 2 herein, and attached, before judgment, a sum of Rs. 515 in the hands of the revision petitioner, the Mettur Industries, Ltd. , hereinafter called the garnishees. This Rs. 515 included a provident fund amount of Rs. 322. Notice of interim attachment was served on the garnishees on 21 December 1957. They did not object to the attachment and the attachment was confirmed on 31 January 1958. The suit was subsequently decreed. When the garnishees were called upon to deposit the attached amount into Court, they intimated the Court, by Ex. A. 1 dated 4 July 1958, that provident fund amount being exempt from attachment, they were unable to deposit the amount. By its letter Ex. A. 2 dated 16 August 1958 the Court however directed the garnishees to deposit the amount whereupon they deposited the amount, it is said, under protest, and by I. A. No. 2637 of 1958 applied to the Court for issue of a cheque for Rs. 322. They averred that the said amount was a portion of the provident fund which they were entitled to withhold and that the decreeholder is entitled only td payment of the balance of the attached amount, namely, Rs. 193. While this application was pending, the decreeholder also applied by E. A. No. 2706 of 1958 for a cheque for the entire Rs. 515 impleading the garnishees also as a respondent. The learned District Munsif heard both the applications together and by a common order dated 23 February 1959 dismissed the garnishees' application and allowed the respondent 1's application. It is the correctness of this order that is challenged in these petitions.

(3.) THE common point urged for the garnishees is that the order directing the issue of cheque to the respondent 1 so far as it relates to the provident fund amount is without jurisdiction as the order of attachment and the subsequent proceedings pursuant to it are void in law.