V.SYED ABDHAEER Vs. MARGADARSI CHITS PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred challenging the order dtd. 1/7/2025 passed in E.P.No.4166 of 2022 in A.R.C.No.24 of 2018 on the file of the XXVII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.

(2.) On the arbitration case in A.R.C.No.24 of 2018 filed by the respondent herein against the petitioner herein and others, the Registrar of Chits, Chennai, passed an Award on 7/1/2019 for recovery of sum of Rs.9,37,255.00 along with interest at the rate of 24% from the date of filing of the case till the date of realization along with costs and also attached the properties of respondents 1 and 3 therein. As the Award amount has not been paid by the principal debtor/Judgment Debtor1(JD), the respondent/decree holder filed E.P.No.4166 of 2022 under Order XXI Rule 48A C.P.C., seeking to attach the salary of petitioner herein/JD-2 payable by the Garnishee of JD2 for realizing the EP claim amount. After hearing, the Execution Court found that there is no impediment to proceed with the execution proceedings and vide order dtd. 1/7/2025, allowed the execution petition and attached 1/3rd salary of the petitioner herein/JD2 for a period of 24 months or until satisfaction of Award and as against the said attachment of salary, the petitioner/JD-2 is before this Court.

(3.) It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Arbitral Award was passed on 7/1/2019 and the Execution petition in E.P.No.4166 of 2022 was filed on 29/8/2022. As per Sec. 71 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982, execution petition has to be filed within a period of 3 years from the date of passing of Award, whereas, in the present case, E.P.No.4166 of 2022 was filed beyond the period of 3 years and therefore, the execution petition is hit by Sec. 71 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982. The petitioner herein is only a guarantor of the principal debtor/JD-I. It is settled law that the co-sureties for the same debt are also equally liable to contribute the debt, which remains unpaid by the principal debtor. In the present case, the creditor/decree holder, without initiating action against the principal debtor or other guarantors, has filed the execution petition only against the petitioner herein/guarantor/JD2 seeking to attach the salary of the petitioner. The learned Judge, without considering the facts, attached 1/3rd salary of the petitioner alone, which is impermissible under law.