BANDARU SATYANARAYANA Vs. SIDDANTAPU SATYASAI BABU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the revision-petitioner. None appeared for the respondent though notice served.

(2.) Learned counsel for the revision-petitioner would submit that this revision-petition is directed against the Order, dtd. 8/2/2016 in E.P.No.36 of 2015 in O.S.No.118 of 2011 on the file of Senior Civil Judge"s Court, Razole, whereunder the Trial Judge observed that the decree-holder has to recover the remaining amount due under the decree by filing execution petition under Order XXI Rule 48 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity "CPC") after a gap of twelve (12) months, though, earlier under the same decree, the salary was attached continuously for a period of twenty four (24) months, and accordingly, dismissed the execution petition filed by the revision-petitioner under Order XXI Rule 37 of CPC.

(3.) Learned counsel would submit that in view of Sec. 60 (i) of CPC, the decree-holder cannot file execution petition under Order XXI Rule 48 of CPC for attachment of salary of the judgment-debtor after it was attached continuously for a period of twenty-four (24) months earlier and therefore, the Trial Court committed material irregularity.