SHANTARAM G PRIOLKAR Vs. ETHELVINA CALDEIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This review application is filed by the petitioner whose Writ Petition No. 281/2004 came to be dismissed in limine.

(2.) A few facts may be stated thus :

(3.) The decree was put to execution in Execution Application No. 29/1995 and warrant for possession was issued. The present petitioner, who is the son of the respondent No. 2, filed an application under Order XXI, Rule 99 of C.P.C. objecting to the delivery of the possession. This objection application under Order XXI, Rule 99 of Civil Procedure Code, came to be dismissed by the Civil Judge by the order dated 13.9.1996 and directed eviction of judgment debtor Jaiwanti as well as objector. The second execution application was filed thereafter bearing Execution Application No. 33/1998. It appears that in the said second Execution Application, the present petitioner was shown as the judgment Debtor No. 2. The Civil Judge passed an order on this execution application directing both the judgment debtors to deliver the possession and to pay the sum of Rs. 18,000/-. This sum was not paid and, therefore, the respondent No. 1/ decree holder sought to attach the salary of the present petitioner. The learned Civil Judge, who heard the application, ordered attachment of the salary of the petitioner, treating him to be the judgment debtor. This order of attachment of salary, passed on 1.4.2004 and the order passed by the Civil Judge on 30.11.1999 was challenged in Writ Petition No. 281/2004.