C A SATTAR Vs. L C AYUB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for both parties.

(2.) . This revision is directed against an order dismissing an application purported to be filed under Order 21 Rule 106 of C.P.C. to recall the arrest warrant issued against the petitioner-judgment debtor on 31-12-1996. The grievance of the petitioner is that his arrest was straightaway ordered by dispensing with the notice under Order 21 Rule 37 C.P.C. and without conducting any enquiry with regard to his means to pay the decretal amount as required under law. The Lower Court has dismissed the application, and refused to recall the arrest warrant observing that "Rule 106 of Order 21 C.P.C. does not attract the prayer of the petitioner" but directed that the petitioner has to appear before the Court and has to give undertaking to pay the E.P. amount showing his bona fides.

(3.) Learned Counsel for respondent has contended that the petitioner is a retired teacher and has ample means to pay the decretal amount and he is wilfully evading to pay and as the Court was satisfied that the petitioner is likely to abscond or leave the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court with a view to delay the execution of the decree, the Court has dispensed with the notice under Order 21 Rule 37(1) as provided in the proviso to the said rule and therefore the order does not call" for any interference. It is also contended that the petitioner has not challenged the original order dated 31-12-1996.