The High Court · 2025

8. Bollu Rajitha \A//o.Srikanth, aged about 35 years, Occ: Hor sewife, R/o.H.Nlo 1 1-21, Padmashaliwada, Manakondur L The HeaC I\4aster School Comlex, Zilla parishad High Schorl Bcppapur, Yellaredd yp,: Vlandal, Rajanna Siricilla District. ...Respondentsi J.Dr; 1 to 6 and 8 (Responclenls 2 to I are not necessary parties to the above riRP) Garnishee lA NO: 2 OF 202t5 Petition urrder Section 5 of Limitation Act praying that in :he circumstances stated in the al'ficl; vit filed in support of the petition, the Hi3h ( ourt may be pleased to conlone the delay of 1165 days in filing the CRp aggrieved by attachment ordcr c erted 05-08-2021 in E.P.No_ 13 of 2A21 in Al,lB.No.468 of 2020on the file :rf t t,-' court of the Senior Civil Judge at Karimr,agar , Karimnagar District. lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition ulde'Section '151 CPC praying that in the c rcunrstarces stated in the affidavit fileil ir support of the petition, the High Court may be pteased to grant stay of all further proceedings in so far as attachment of petit oner,s salary is concerned pu'sriant to the attachment order dated 05-08-202 1 in E.p.No.13 of 2021 in ARB.I'io 4t3) of 2O2O on the file of the court of the Senior Oivil Judge at Karimnagar, pen lirr I disposal of the above CRP. Counsel for the lDertitioner: Sri Vadlakonda Ravi Kumar Reddy Counsel for the lR()!;pondent No.l: Sri G. Vasantha Rayudu The Court made tl're following: ORDER k----'Mr:rffiffi THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN I.A.No.2 of 2o25 ln and CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.377 OF 2O2s COMMON ORDER: Heard Sri Vadlakonda Ravi Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri G.Vasantha Rayudu, learned counsel appearing for 1sr respondent.

2. l"t respondent had liled an application under .section 64 of Chit Funds Act, I9B2 uide A.R.B.No.46g of 2O2O before the Chit Arbitrator-cum-Deputy Registrar of Chits, Karimnagar, who in turn passed a, award dated 01.03.2021 ftxing the liability on the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 9. vid,e aforesatd award, learned Arbitrator held that both petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 9 are jointly and severally liable to pay the awarded amount. l"t respondent has frled an execution petition under Order XXI Rule 48 CPC uide E.p.No.13 of 2O2t in A.R.B.No.468 of 2O2O for recovery of the said awarded amount from petitioner and respondent Nos.2 to 9. Vid.e order to attach salar5r of the petitioner dated 05.08.2o2r,learned executing court directed the disbursing offrcer of the petitioner to withhold an amount of Rs.35,46,337/- from salary of the petitioner in monthly ,, installments o{ I l3,d of salary of every month and rernit the said amount to tl,e rr,:count of the tr.P 3 . S in-r lar attachment orders were also iss red by the executing Cl rL-r t tn respect of JDRs 3 and 4 dated t)5.08.2021. Challenging -hr' said impugned attachment, petitionerTJDR 7 filed the present ;-e,r srion petition.

4. P,:rrr;al of record would revea-l thal 2tut re';pondent is the subsc riirr:: of the chit and petitioner arrd respondent Nos.3 to 1) ar' : the guarantors. l"t responclent ha d 'filed aJoresaid irp pli:ation under Section 64 of the Chit Funds Act, 7982 uide A B. ?.No.468 of 2O2O and there is no disprrte that the learned Albrtri tor/Deputy Registrar of Chits, Kerinrnagar has passed 2n 2r:ir;,11 rl dated 01.03.2021 . There is also -ro cispute that 1st responC('n I has filed the aforesaid execuLtiorr pt:titron uide E.P.No- 13 o '.2)21 and that the executing Crrurl is:,ued salary attachmen - rrje rs in respect of petitioner /JDR 7 and JDR2 and JDR4 diret:tr r11 "he Disbursement Officers of JDRs. 2, 4 and 7 to withhold an .rrrount of Rs.35,46,337 /- each liont their salaries and remit '-hr: ss11s to the account of the aforesaid E.I. Thus, by virtue of the al:resaid three salary attachmenl orrlers, executing Court dire<:tr:d -r-re Disbursing Officers to withhold entire amount ) 3 covered in the said E.P. each from the aforesaid JDRs. The same is impermissible. The said issue is no more res integra.

5. Vide order dated 12.O7.2024 in C.R.p.No. lS52 of 2024, this Court held that the said action of executing Court in issuing salar5z attachment directing the Disbursing Officers of JDRs to withhold entire decreetal amount from each of the JDR is illegal.

6. It is also relevant to extract Order XXI, Rules 1 l(21, 4g and 48A of the CPC and the sarne are as under: ")Q Rule 11 (21 of CPc-Written application - Save as otherwise provided by sub-rule (l), every application for the execution of a decree shall be in writing, signed and verilied by the applicant or by some other person proved to the satisfactron of the Court to be acquainted with the facts of the case, and sha_ll contain in a tabular form the following particulars, namely- (a) the number of the suit; (b) the names of the parties; (c) the date of the decree; (d) whether any appeal has been preferred from the decree; (e) whether any, and (if any) what, pa1,.rnent or other adjustment of the matter in controversy has been made between the parties subsequently to the decree; (f) whethei any, and (if any) what, previous applications have been made for the execution of the decree, the dates of such applications and their results; (g) the amount with interest (if any) due upon the decree, or ottrer relief granted thereby, together with particulars of any cross-decree, whether passed before or after the date of the decree sought to be executed; ) 4 (h) tJle zLrr oLr r, of the costs (if any) awarded; (i) the ralrc rl the person against whom execution o[ he r ecree is sought; ar d (j) the morlc in which the assistance of the C.turt is -equired whether - (i) by th: ircli ,r:ry of any property specihcally decreeC; (ii) by ttLc rr:t r,rhment, or by the attachment and sale, or by the sale wrthout ar :.1c ''r ment, of any property; (iii) by tJre arr est ar-rd detention in prison of any pers;on; {iv} by llrc r1r1r,,intmenl of a receiver; (v) otherru st:. . s the nature of the relief grar-rted ma; req_rire. Order XXI Flrrl.e 48 of CPc-Attachment of salary or altowa nces of servant <:,f the Government or railway company or: local authority - I I Where the property to be attached is t te s rlary or allowant:e:; o a servant of the Government or oI a s err, a nt of a railway ;ornp.r'r1' or local authority or of a servant of a corl oration engaged ir ar'1 trade or industry which is established bv zr r )entra_i, Provinciirl or Sitate Act, or a Government company as del ined in section ; I 7 ( ,l the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1,156) the Court, whether tlre j 'l rlgment-debtor or the disbursing officer is oj is not within ttrc o'r limits of the Court's jurisdiction, may orler that the amount si,all subject to the provisions of section 60, te q ithheld from such ;al r.-y or allowances either in one payment or by r tonthly instalmeot:; :i:, the Court may direct; and upon notice of the < rder to such ofllct - ,i I the appropriate Government may b.r norificz tion in the Offic. al (ii z3ttc appoint in this behalf,- (a) wherr. str')r sa1ary or allowances are to be disbu rsei ruit rin the local limits tr: .rhich this Code for the time being ext,_-nds, thc officer or other ,)ers{) I \\'hose duty it is to disburse the sam,: shirll wrthhold a;rd rem t :o -ire Court the amount due under the order. or the monthly :n ..t.il nrents, as the case may be; (b) wherc srrr:l salar5r or allowances aJe to be disbursed be_yc nd t1-e said limr:s r [- e ofhcer or other person within those lirntts whose dut], it is to irr; r-uct the disbursing authority regarding the amount \ 5 of the salary of allowances to be disbursed shall rernit to the Court the arnount due under the order, or the monthly instalments, as the case may be, and shall direct the disbursing authority to reduce the aggregate of the amounts from time to time, to be disbursed by ttre aggregate of the amounts from time to time remitted to the Court. (2) Where the attachable proportion of such salary or allowances is ' already being withheld and remitted to a Court in pursuance of a previous and unsatisfied order of attachment, the officer appointed by the appropriate Government in this behalf shail forthwith return the subsequent order to the Court issuing it with a full statement of all the particulars of the e)dsting attachment. (3) Every order made under this rule, unless it is returned in accordance with the provisions of sub-rule (2) shall, without further notice or other process, bind the appropriate Government or.the railway company or local authority or corporation of Government company, as the case may be, while the judgment-debtor is within the local limits to which this Code for the time being extends and while he is beyond those limits, if he is in receipt of any salar5r or allowances payable out of the Consolidated Fund of India or the Consolidated Fund of the State or the funds of a railway company or local authority or corporation or Government compzrny in India; and the appropriate Government or the railway company or local authority or corporation or Government company, as the case may be, shall be liable for any sum paid in contravention of this rule. Explanation.-In this rule, "appropriate Government" means,- (i) As respects €rny person in the service of the Central Government, or any servant of a railway administration or of a cantonment authority or of the port authority of a major port, or any servant of a corporation engaged in any trade or industry which is established by a Central Act, or any servant of a Government company in which ally part of the share capital is held by the Central Government or by more than one State Governments or partly by the Central Government and partly by one or more State Governments, the Central Government; \ I ! I 6 (ii) As res rr:c t; arty other servant of the Government, o- a s,:n,alt of alry otlre- lr:rl or other authority, or any servanl of ir co: poration engagc,l in ,rny trade or industry which is e stat,lishr:d by a Provincial o State act, or a servant of any other Gor err-rment compalr], t11 r State Government. Order )lXI Rule - 48A. Attachment of salary or a[ow;rnces of private employees.- (1) Where the property to b. atlach( d is the salary cr allor.vances of an employee other than an eml loyee to whom rul : .1 3 applies, the Court, where the disbursing oflic er of the emplov,:e is ,r'ithin the local limits of the Court's juris.dict on, may order tllar) lr,: amount shall, subject to the provisron of se,:Lion 60, be withht:ld r om such salary or allowarrces either ln lne layment or by mortlLly instalments as the Court may direct: alc upcn notice ofthe crd:r r such disbursing officer, such disbu:singl olli:er shall remit to tllc r lurt the amount due under the order, or thc m<rnthly instalmer. Ls. as the case may be. (2) Wht rr rl'e attachable portion of such salary or allow rnces is already b: irr1 1 rvithheld or rcmitted to the Court in pu rsua ece of a previou s i.nl ,rnsatished order of attachment, the rlisbrrrsirg officer shall fortl'rvi,Ir return the subsequent order to the Colrrt issuing it with a lrrlL statement of all the particuiars of rhe existing attachnre, t. (3) Eve r- ()r.1,rr made under this rule, unless i- is returned in accordan( l rith the provisions of sub-rule (2), sba1l, wrthout further n,;t < r or other process, hind the employe r w rile the judgmelrt d(:l)1ors, is within the local limits to which this t)ode for the timt: l rcrr p extends and while he is beyond those-li:nits if he is - s:rlary or allowances payable out of the func s of an in receipt o employe r in rur-y part of lndia, and the employer shall be 1 able for urny sunr lrair n contravention of this ru1e." 7 It is also relevant to extract Section I tf the Chit Funds Act, 1,:)8.11 and the same is as under: \ / 7 '71. Money how recovered.-Every order passed by the Registrar or the nominee under section 68 or section 69 and every order passed by the State Government in appeal under section 7O for payment of any money shall, if not carried out,_ (a) on a certificate issued by the Registrar, be deemed to be a decree of a Civil Court, and shall be executed in the same manner as a decree of such Court, or (b) be executed in accordance with the provisions of any law for the time being in force for the recovery of amounts as arrears of land revenue: Provided that no application for execution under clause (b) shall be made after the expiry of three years from the date hxed in the order, and if no such date is fixed, from the date ofthe order.,,

8. It is also relevant to extract Sections 126, L2g arld 146 of the Indian Contract Act, I8Z2 and the sarne are as under: "126. "Contract of guarantee", "surety", .principal debtor', and "creditor".-A "contract of guarantee,, is a contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability, of a third person in case of his default. The person who gives the guarantee is called the "surety"; the person in respect of whose default the guarantee is given is called the "principal debtor., and the person to whom the guarantee is given is called the "creditor,,. A gu arantee may be either oral or written. 128. Surety's liability.-The liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor, unless it is otherwise provided by the contract. 146. Co-sureties liable to contribute equally.-Where two or more persons are co-sureties for the same debt or duty, either jointly or severally, and whether under the sarne or different contracts, and whether with or without the knowledge of each other, the^co-sureties, in the absence of a;ry contract to t}re contrary, are liable,\s between themselves, to pay each an equal share of the 8 whole rit,bt. rr of that part of it which remains ullpar'l by the prrncipal clr: r or. " \ g. J'hr s;, the liability of the co-surety is co-exLensive with that of prir ci1 ,:r1 debtor unless it is otherwise prov ded by the contract. Il e s,aid principle was also laid dowr: b1 a Division Bench of thr' lrigh Court of Judicature for the States t:f Telalgana and Andhra [)',rdesh at Hyderabad in Punyamurthurla Venkata Viswa Sundar':. Rao v. M/s. Margadarsi Chit Fund h''t. Ltd.r.

10. J'h: aforesaid relevant provisions woulcl re,,ea1 that for realization of -he amount covered under the art,itra tion award, respondent \,r. L /decree holder has to hle an applic ltion under Order XXI Flul,: I | (21 of CPC. Accordingly, respo;rde.rt No.1 had frled the aloler;,rid execution petition uide tr.P.N,r.13 of 2021.

11. I r Punyamurthula Venkata Viswa lJundata Rao's case (suprz . ), the Division Bench on consic erat-ion of the arguments :rc .'irnced by the parties, framed tht: fo llowing two points for r:o.rr; rleration: u 1,: 1 b er the decree holder has to proceed agarn st a1 the jrrdl3rr cnt debtors, who are guarantors, by claiming pr-o 5l rtionate anount decreed. | 2077 (3) Al,T r3it '.t).8.) \ i:3? rai 1 I / 9 11_ whether the execution Courts in which E'Ps' were frled against the present judgment debtors, who are revision petitions herein, have jurisdiction to entertain the execution petitions." i 12. On consideration of the provisions of the Chit Funds Act and the CPC, the Division Bench held that the course that has to be followed by the decree holder is to make an application to the Registrar for execution, to be forwarded to the proper authority at the option of the decree holder and the Registrar shall himself issue the certificate and forward the said application to the Court or revenue authority, as chosen by the decree holder' The decree holder has art option to proceed against either the principal debtor or any of the guarantors or against all of them' Referring to Section 128 of the Indian Contract Act' the Division Bench held that the liability of a suret5r is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor unless it is otherwise provided by the i contract

13. In Madamanchi Anill Kumar v' Margadarshi Chit Fund hrt. Limitedz, Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad considering the said principle laid down by the Division Bench in Punyamurthula Venkata Viswa Sundaia Rao,scase(supral),heldthattheliabilityofthesuretiesisjoint z C.R.P.No.2338 of 2018, decided on O5'11 2018 l0 and seve,-a,. the Division Bench also negativec th: contention raised by tl'e retitioner therein that a Recovel. crerti [icate issued by the Dr:pr11t- Registrar of Chits calnot be actr:d Lrpon, as per Rule 55 ol tlic F.ndhra pradesh chit Fund Rules, 20oB and that a, execution is r:taintainable only if the recovery certificzrte has been issued by :h: Fl:gistrar of Chits to the competent Civil ,Jourt. \

14. C)n <:onsideration of the aforesaid provrsions ald on examination r:' the facts of the case theretn, Prattipati Srinivasa R:tc, rr, M/s. Shriram City Union Fin:rncr,r Limiteds this Court hr: r1 that respondent No. 1/decree recover d:rlLlt e the awarded amount f rom petitionersT ir,:dg rnent debtors therein and it is entitled for i the decretal afrro rtn and interest as claimed by it from tht: judgment debtors. holler cannot I 1 5. ^lh e I a.cts in the present case are squar.r:I1. ( )overed by the a_foresai,l : r.r l,:r. 1 "t respondent calnot file r:xec,utir ,n petition seeking reccv(:1-/ ,rf al amount of Rs.35,46 ,332 / eachjrom JDRs and executi n;r ( ourt without considering the irfor:sai C aspects cannot direr:t r.l t: Disbursing Officers of JDRs 2, 4 and Z to withhold thr_' :n _rre decreetal amount each from JDI,ls, which 3 Common Ord,rr .n ,lRl) Nos. 133 & 151 of 2023, decided on 02.O3.,.1023 ) tl,l:i!t .-_ --._, -,o_aa - ': amounts to recovery of three times of the amount covered under execution petition. The same is impermissible. T

16. Therefore, the impugned attachment order dated 05.O8.2O2I in tr.P.No. L3 of 2O2l in A.R.B.No.468 of 2O2O passed by learned senior civil Judge, Karimnagar is liable to be set aside and iass6ldingly set aside. The matter is remanded back to the executing Court to decide E.p.No. 13 of 2O2l in A.R.B.No.46g of 2O2O strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down under law considering the aJoresaid aspects as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. L7. In the light of the aforesaid discussion and also on satisfying the reasons mentioned in the afhdavit fi1ed in support of the petition, I.A.No.2 of 2025 is allowed and the delay of 1165 days in filing the civil revision petition is condoned.

18. The Civil Revision petition is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, sha-ll stand closed. DY Sd/- P. PADMANABHA RE DEPUTY REGISTRA To, //TRUE COPY// E SECTION OFFICER { 1 . The Senior Civil Judge at Karimnagar. ,h< 2. One CC to Sri Vadtar'konOa nari iii,a l,*\._- J. One CC to Sri c. Vasantha Rayudu, A 'P.

4. Two CD Copies Kam/MAH r.Reddy, Advocate [OpUCl ovocate [OpUC] HIGH COUFIT DATED:1 :2ltl3l2025 COMMON ORDER l.A.No.2 ol 2,025 in/and CRP.No.l|7't of 2025 ALLOWING THE l.A.No.2 of 2025 AND Cl\/!lL REVISION PETITION b gnl .-i I :--'r -:-- l rtl . s 6i ,o S' (-, '1. 2 O JIl\l 2W a,( J, ;:- I C) .) .. -.i +