S K SAIDA Vs. P VENKATA NARASAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first respondent raised an Industrial Dispute before the Labour Court, Guntur against the petitioner in I.D.No.86 of 1991. He claimed to be the employee of the petitioner. The Labour Court passed an award, directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.72,000/- to the respondent. The 1st respondent filed E.P.No.5 of 1997, and prayed for the arrest of the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner resisted the E.P. He pleaded that he filed I.P.No.7 of 1997, in the Court of Additional Subordinate Judge, Guntur, and as along as the I.P. is pending, he cannot be arrested for non-compliance with the decree. The trial Court rejected his plea, and ultimately directed his arrest, through its order dated 5-11-1999

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that sub-section (3) of Section 55 C.P.C. casts a duty on the executing court to inform a judgment debtor, who is sought to be arrested, that he can file I.P. and that being the case, there was no justification on the part of the executing court directing the arrest of the petitioner, though he filed an I. P. He further submits that the executing court did notfollow the procedure prescribed under the relevant provisions of C.P.C.