The High Court · 2025

tVI/s. Shriram Chits Pvt. Ltd, Nizamabad - ll Branch, Nizamabad, Rep. by its GPA Holder. Shaik Siraj, s/o Shaik Moin, occ Business, M/r. Si;;lEDi"P"3ffill?; T No. 12-5-5'6, Arsapally Division No. 36, Sarangapoor, Nizamabad, Telangana State. W. Pandit, S/o Sudam, A/aterial Supply Business, R/o H. No. 10-9-582/3, Santosh Nagar, Nagaram Road, Nizamabad. lt/I. Nehru, S/o Hachi, Occ. Business, trrl/s. Nehru Tours and Travels, R/o H. No. 2-108, Ganeshkunta Thanda, Rajanna Gudem Village, Rayaparthi Mandal, Warangal District, Telangana State. (Respondents 2"to 4 herein are not necessaHEEFAFJIi,fSSL*= 1,3 & 4 lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court rnay be pleased to stay all further proceedings in pursuance, of Form No. 19, Ordering to attach salary of this petitioner vide order dated: 12-03-2024 passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nizamabad passed in E.P. No. 65 of 2O22 in ARB No 166 of 2018 pending disposal of the main CRP Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri T. p. Acharya Counsel for the Respondents: - The Court made the following: ORDER THE 1{ONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI C.R.P.No. 422 of 2025 ORDER Heard Mr T P Acharya, learned counsel for re;vision petitioner.

2. Thir; revision petition has filed assailing issuance of Form No.l 9 t.e., Order of attachment of salary of the revision petitior er/J udgment Debtor Nc.2 virle order dated 12.03.2024 in E p No 65 of 2022 in ., Arb No.166 of ?018 passed by the principal Junior Civil Judge, N izama ba d.

3. Briefly st.lted the relevant facts are that the r.espondent No.2/Judgment L,ebtor No.1, who was subscriber and prize,,vinner in the chit conducted b1 the respondent No..1/t\4/s shriram chits pr vate Limited had showrr the rt:vision petitioner/Judgment Debtor No.2 and two others as guarantors to collect the prize amount. As the re_pa),ments were neglected, the respondent No.1 filed arbitration case and the Deputy Registrar :f the Chits, Nizamabad, had passed irrpugneJ award on

15.01 .2021 holdi^g the principal debtor and the guarantors joinfly and severally liable. -ater, the award was forwarded to the exe:;uting court along with recov€'ry certificate. whereupon the execution petition was filed seeking attachment of sarary of the revision petitionr,rrlJ udgment Debtor Nc.2 anrj the executing Court had issued the impugned 2 attachment warrant on 12.03.2024 Assailing the attachment warrant' present revision has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would contend that the respondent No.1/Decree Holder leaving the principal judgment debtor/respondent No-2, filed execution petition seeking attachment of the salary of the guarantor/revision petitioner and lhe impugned warrant was issued without proper notice. That apart, the revision petitioner has liability to clear six more loans which would be collected from his salary ? accountintheBankandiftheamountsweredeductedbythedisbursing authority, would result in serious prejudice to his interests Further pleads thathehadfiledapplicationsbeforetheexecutingCourtyldeE.A.No.l2l of 2024 to set aside lhe ex-paie order and another application vide E.A.No.122 o'f 2024 is filed for closing up the attachment of warrant. The Court without determining those applications' proceeding with attachment of salary is improper, thus prayed for interference'

5. I have perused the materials on record'

6. Admittedly, within two years of the award' the execution petition was filed, however the attachment warrant was issued by the Court on 12.03.2024. The execution petition was filed within two years and the provisotoRule22oforder2loftheCodeofCivilProcedure,specifies thatnonoticetothejudgmentdebtorsisnecessaryinexecution,ifthe 3 execution petitiol is filed within two years. Nonetheless, the Court may at I its discrelion issue attachment warrsnt/process, evLrn rn thr,l case where issuance of shorv cause notice is required, if it finds unreas;onable delay or to mee,t the e nds of justice. Further, notice is required in the cases, where ther decree is sought to be executed against the as;signee, legal representirtive cr in the cases where the judgment debt,rr has been declared insolvent. Therefore, as the judgment debtor in ther instant case , t does not fall within these categories, issuance of attachrnent warrant \ , without nc,tice is terfectly justified under law

7. Furlhermo.e. the revision petitioner's contest as to ser vice of show cause nolice prior to the issuance of attachment warrant is; without any legal prov sion nandating service of show cause notice on the judgment debtor who is in similar stance to that of the revisio n petitioner. Admittedly, the award was passed against the revision petit oner holding jointly anc severally liable along with the subscriber/princil.ral judgment debtor. That being the position, no impropriety is found in tht: issuance of warrant for attach ment of salary. B. Be tlat as t may, having regard to the submission thar the revision petitioner had filerd two lnterim Applications before the exe,luting court and they are nct being considered, directing the execLtting Court to determine these apprications on their own merits at rhe earriest, I 4 a) preferably within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, is found appropriate and accordingly ordered.

9. With this direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. closed. As a sequel, miscellaneous app[cations, pending if any, shall stand i ,,i EDDY sd/- P. PADMANABHA d DEPUTY Rq/rS TRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, '1 . The Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nizamabad 2. One CC to Sri T. P. Acharya, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD CoPies VH/T]L I I ./ HIGH COURI' DATED: 0710212025 (. or TEf4 t s a. + e {-. J ,') 4l o !J. \\\s Jo .t ORDER CRP.No.422 ctl2025 DISPOSING OF THE CRP I {n u h