VELRAJ Vs. MUTHIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Civil Revision Petition is filed by the decree-holder/plaintiff in O. S. No. 247 of 2004 before the Principal District munsif Court, Sankarankovil. The suit was filed for recovery of money due from the respondent. In terms of the decree dated 23-7-2004, E. P. No. 21 of 2005 was filed for attachment of salary and the same was dismissed.

(2.) SUBSEQUENTLY the decree holder/revision petitioner filed E. P. No. 96 of 2005 under Order 21 Rules 37 and 38 seeking arrest and detention of the respondent/judgment-debtor in the civil prison for not satisfying the decree amount. In support of the e. P. No. 96 of 2005, an affidavit was filed by the revision petitioner stating that the respondent is having sufficient means but is evading payment of decree amount deliberately, to defeat the claim of the revision petitioner. A counter affidavit was filed by the respondent to the effect that he is living in poverty. He has however stated that he is ready to pay the decretal amount. The revision petitioner was examined as P. W. 1 and no one has been examined on behalf of the respondent/judgment-debtor. The revision petitioner marked Ex. P1-Salary Certificate of the respondent. After considering the plea of the revision petitioner, the Court below however dismissed the said E. P. No. 96 of 2005 holding in paragraphs 10, 11, 12 and 13 as follows :

(3.) AGGRIEVED by the order of the Court below, this revision petition has been filed. Notice was served on the respondent on 3-4-2007 and subsequently telegram was sent intimating the date of hearing. A telegram dated 29-1-2008 was sent stating the date of hearing as 31-3-2008. The intimation as above was filed before this Court by way of a proof affidavit. The respondent failed to appear before this Court in spite of sufficient notice.