SHRI VED PARKASH Vs. SMT. SNEHLATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated 28.3.1987 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Amritsar whereby he has directed issuance of warrants for arrest of the judgment debtor -Petitioner and for his production in his Court on April 8, 1987 so that on that date he pays the decretal amount along with interest.

(2.) ON a petition under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short the 'Act') filed by the wife -Respondent, a decree for alimony was passed in her favour and against the Petitioner on 28.9.1986. She filed an application for execution of the decree. The learned Additional District Judge as the Executing Court, issued a notice to the Petitioner to show cause why should he be not committed to civil prison. This notice was served on the Petitioner on March 24, 1987 and he was directed to appear in the Court. On 28 3.1987 on his non appearance the impugned order was passed.

(3.) I have considered the rival contentions of the learned Counsel for the parties. It is evident that the warrants for arrest of the Petitioner have been issued through the impugned order on his non -appearance in the Court in response to the notice to show cause served on him, which was evidently issued under Order 21 Rule 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure. So, when he did not appear in the Court in obedience to the said notice, the Court was well within its jurisdiction to issue warrants for his arrest in pursuance of Sub -rule (2) of Rule 37 ibid, the purpose of issuance of warrants for his arrest to secure his presence before the Executing Court so that proceedings consistent with Rule 40 ibid could be taken. It is in the course of such subsequent proceedings that the Court has to record its satisfaction as regards requirement contained in proviso to Section 51 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that he shall put in appearance before the learned Executing Court on the date which may be fixed by me. I therefore, direct the Petitioner to appear before the Executing Court on November 20. 1988 when proceedings under Rule 40 ibid shall be taken. However, on his failure to abide by this directions, the warrants for his arrest shall be issued in pursuance of the impugned order.