NANDURI SATYANARAYANA RAJU Vs. GOLLA SUBBA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order dated 06-06-2011 in E.A No. 37 of 2011 in E.P No. 90 of 2008 in O.S No. 175 of 2006 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge at Kodad is questioned in this civil revision petition.

(2.) The petitioner is the decree holder who obtained decree against respondent No. 1 for recovery of certain amounts. Respondent No. 1 is the employee of Bharat Sanchar Nigal Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'BSNL') working under the administrative control of the General Manager, Telecom District, Vijaywada, Krishna District. Respondent No. 2 is the salary disbursing officer of respondent No. 1. The petitioner filed E.P No. 90 of 2008 for execution of the decree obtained by him. In the said E.P., the petitioner filed E.A No. 37 of 2011 under Order XXI Rule 48 (3) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, 'CPC') for recovery of the entire E.P amount through respondent No. 2. The said application has been dismissed by the Court below by a reasoning which appears to be strange. The Court below in the first phase held that salary is not a debt and the Executing Court has no power to direct to attach the salary of the judgment debtor and recover the same through respondent No. 2 - garnishee. The Court below went on further to hold that in view of explanations 1 and 2 to Order XXI Rule 48 (3) CPC, the decree holder is at liberty to proceed against the appropriate government and not against respondent No. 2 for recovery of the EP amount. In the opinion of this Court, both these reasons are wholly unsustainable.

(3.) As regards the first mentioned reasoning of the Court below, it has completely overlooked the provisions of Section 60 and Rule 48 of Order XXI of CPC. Under Clause (i) of Section 60 CPC, the lands, houses or other buildings, goods, money, bank notes, cheques, bills of exchange, hundis, promissory notes, government securities, bonds or other securities for money, debts, shares in a corporation etc., belonging to the judgment debtor are liable for attachment. Sub-clause (i) of proviso to Section 60 CPC exempts from attachment, salary to the extent of Rs. 1,000/- and two-thirds of the remainder in execution of a decree other than the decree for maintenance. This provision is subject to the proviso incorporated in the said sub-clause.