The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section '151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings including attachment of salary of the petitioners in pursuance of the Order dated 05-07-2024 in E.P.No.61 of 2024 in ARB.No.868 of 202'l passed by Learned Junior Civil Judge, at Huzurnagar, pending disposal of the main CRP. Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. Rajesh Bathula Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. K. Sai Krishna The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CIVIL RE\TISION PETITION No.752 OF 2025 ORAL ORDER: Irleard Mr. Rajesh Bathuta, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K. Sai Krishnq leamed counsel for respondent No'1'

2. This revision is hled under Section - 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 05.07.2024 passed in E'P' No'61 of 2022 in Arbitration Case ARB No.868 of 2021 by the Junior Civil Judge at Huzurabad.

3. On the application filed by respondent No.l vrde Arbitration Case ARB No.868 of 2021, the Chit Arbitrator/Deputy Registrar of Chits, Warangal, had passed an award dated20'06'2022 directing the petitioners herein and respondent Nos.2 and 3 to pay an amount of Rs.6,66,105/- along with interest @ 18% per annum on the principal amount of Rs.4,33,600/- from the date of filing the dispute till the date of realization. They shall also pay Rs.l4,44ll- towards costs of the arbitration proceedings.

4. Pursuant to the said award, respondent No'l herein had filed an execution petition vide E.P. No.6l of 2022 in ARB No'868 of 2021 I I I I , ,,t.o{ seeking execution of the said award against the petitioners herein and 2 KI,,J ( RP No 752 of2025 respondent No.3 for recovery of Rs.7,41,735l- from them. Vide the aforesaid order. leamed Junior Civil Judge, directed the Disbursing Officer of the petitioners, to withhold the amormt of Rs.g,63,g32l- from the monthly salary of the petitioners herein. They are judgment debtor Nos.2 and 3 in the said E.P. Respondent No.2 is the chit subscriber, while the petitionen herein and respondent No.3 are guarantors for the subject chit.

5. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners herein that the Executing Court did not order lbr proportionate deduction among the judgment debtors. Before passing the order, the Executing Court neither issued notice, nor provided opportunity ofhearing.

6. It is also relevant to note that, it appears that leamed Executing C'ourt issued similar orders directing the Disbursing Officer ofjudgment debtor No.4 to withhold the said amount of Rs.g,63,g32l_ from his salaries as per Section - 60 ofCpC after deducting standard deduction plus one thousand and,2l3'd of remaining gross salary and shall remit balance 1/3d of salary every month from the date of receipt ofthe warrant.

7. Thus. the Executing Court directed the Disbursing Oflicer of judgment debtor No.2 to 4 to deduct and recover the aforesaid amount \ \ v (\ I KL.J CRP No.752 of2025 from the salaries of judgment debtor Nos.2 to 4 each. If the Disbursing Officer withholds the said amount and remits to the account of the aforesaid E.P., it amounts to recovery of more than the awarded amount. Thus, the same is in violation of the procedure laid down under Contract Act, the Chit Fund ect, 1SSZ and also the principle laid down by this Court. The said aspects were not considered by the Executing Court while issuing impugned salary attachment orders.

8. It is relevant to extract Order - XXI, Rules - 1l (2)' a8 and 48A of the CPC and the same are as under: "XXI Rule I I (2) 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 verified by the applicant or b1' some other person proved to the satisfaction ofthe Court to be acquainted with the lacts ofthe case' and shall contain in a tabular form the following particulars, namely- (a) the number ofthe suit; (b) the names ofthe Parties; (c) the date of thc dccrcel (d) whether any appeal has been preferred from the decree; (e) whether any, and (ifany) what, payment or other adjustment of the matter in controversy has been made between the parties subsequently to the deeree; .l KL.J {lRP No.752 of2025 (f) uhcther any, and (if any) what, previous applications have been made For the execution of the decree. the dates ol such applications and their results; (g) the amount with interest (if any) due upon the decree, or other relief granted thereby, together with particulars ol'any cross-decree, whether passed before or after the date ol the decree sought to be executed: (h) the amount ofthe costs (ifany) awarded; (i) the name ofthe person against whom execulion of the decree is sought; and fi) the mode in which the assistancc of the Court is required whelher- (i) bv thc delivery ofany property specifically decreed; (ii) by the attachment, or by the attachmenr and sale. or by the sale without attachmenl ofany propertyi (iii)b1" the arrest and dctention in prison ofany person; (ir )br the appointmenr ola receiver; (v) otherwise, as the nature ofthe relief granted may require." "Order XXI Rule 48 of CPC-Attachment of salary or allowances of servant of the Goyernment or railway comparv or local authority.- (l) Where the property to be attached is the salary or allowances of a servant of the Govemmenl or of a servant of a railway company or local authorif or ofa servant ofa corporation engaged in any trade or industry which is established by a Central. Provincial or State Act, or a Govemment company as defined in section 617 of the Companies Acq 1956 (l of 1956)l the Cour! whether the judgment-debtor or the disbursing officer is or is not within the local limits of the Court's jurisdiction, may order that the amount shall, subject to the provisions of section 60, be withheld from such salary or allowances either in one palment or bl monthly instalments as the Court may direct; and upon a \ notice of the order to such officer as the appropriate \ t 5 KI,J CR? No 752 of 2025 Govemment may by notification in the Official Gazette appoint in this behalfl- (a) where such salary or allowances are to be disbursed within the local limits to which this Code for the time being extends, the officer or other person whose duty it is to disburse the same shall withhold and remit to the Court the amount due under the order, or the monthly instalments' as the case may be; (b) where such salary or allowances are to be disbursed beyond the said limits, the officer or other person within those limits whose duty it is to instruct the disbursing authority regarding the amount ofthe salary or allowances to be disbursed shall remit to the Court the amount due under the order, or the monthly instalments, as the case may be, and shall direct the disbursing authority to reduce the aggregate ofthe amounts from time to time, to be disbursed by the aggregate of the amounts fiom 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 ol attachment, the officer appointed by the appropriate Govemment in this behalf shalt forthwith retum the subsequent order to the Court issuing it with a full statement ofall the particulars ofthe existing attachment' (3) Every order made under this rule, unless it is retumed in accordance with the provisions of sub-rule (2) shall' without further notice or other process, bind the appropriate Govemment or the railway company or local authority or corporation of o 6 KL.J CRP No 752 of2025 Govemment company, as the case may be, while the judglnent- 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 salary or allowances payable out o1' 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 Govemment company in India; and the appropriate Govemment or the railway company or local authority or corporation or Govemment company, as the case may be. shall be liable for any sum paid in contravention of this rule. Lrplanation.-ln this rule, "appropriate Govcmmcnt" means-- (i) As respects any person in the service of the Ccntral Govemment, or any servant of a railway administration or of a cantonment authority or ofthe port authority ofa 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 Govemment company in which any part of the share capital is held by the Central Government or by more than one State Governments or partly by the Central Govemment and parrly by one or more State Govemments, the Central Government: (ii) As respects any other servant of the Govemmenl or a servant ofany other local or other authority, or any servant ofa corporation engaged in any trade or industry which is established by a Provincial or State act, or a servant ofan1, other Govemment company, the State Government.,, XXI, Rule "Order 48A. Attachment of salarv or \ -1 l.rrrrn.*. of private employees.- ( I ) Where ths property b be \ .ll 7 KI,J CRP No 752 of2025 attached is the salary or allowances of an employee other than an employee to whom rule 48 applies, th€ Court' where the disbursing officer of the employee is within the local limits of the Court's jurisdiction, may order than the amount shall' subject to the provision of section 60, be withheld from such salary or allowances either in one payment or by monthly instalments as the Court may direct; and upon notice of the order to such disbursing officer, such disbursing offrcer shall remit to the court the amouni due under the order, or the monthly instahnents, as the case maY be. (2) Where the attachable portion ofsuch salary or allowances is already being withheld or remitted to the Court in pursuance of a previous and unsatisfied order of attachmen! the disbursing officer shall forthwith retum the subsequent order to the Court issuing it with a full statement of all the particulars of the existing attachment. (3) Every order made under this rule, unless it is retumed in accordance with the provisions of sub-rule (2)' shall' without further notice or other process, hind the employer while the judgmenFdcbtors, is within the local limils to which this Code for the time being extends and while he is beyond those-limits' if he is in receipt of salary or allowances payable out of the funds of an employer in any part of India' and the employer shall be tiable for any sum paid in contravention of this rule'" It is relevant to extract Section - 7l of the Chit Fund Act' 9 1982 and the same is as under: I I 8 KL,J CRP No.752 of2025 /\\ "71. Money how recovered.-Ever1 order passed h1, the Registrar or the nominee under section 68 or section 69 and even' order passed by the State Govemment in appeal under section 70 for payment ofany money shall, ifnot canied 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 accordalce with the provisions ofany law for the time being in force for thc recovery of amounts as arrearc of land revenue: Provided that no application for execution under clzruse (b) shall be made afler the expiry of three years from the dale fixed in the order, and if no such dare is fixed. lrom the <jate of the order."

10. lt is also relevant to extract Sections - 126, l1ll and 146 of the Indian ( lontract Act, 1872 and the same is as under: "126. "Contract of guarantee', *surety., ,.principal debtor" and "creditor".-A "contracl of guarantee,' is a contract to perfi)rm the promise, or discharge the liability, of a third person in case ol 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 pers()n to whom the guarantee is given is called the ..creditor,,. A guarantee may be either oral or written.,' "128. Surety,s liability.-The liability of the surery is co- extensive with that ofthe principal debror, unless it is otherwise I pro!ided by the contract." \ ,/ i 9 KI.J CR? No 752 of2025 "146. Co-sureties liable to contribute equally.-Where two or more persons ars co-sureties for the same debt or dury, either jointly or severally, and whether under the same or different contracts, and whether with or without the knowledge of each other, the co-sureties, in the absence of any contract to the contrary, are liable, as between themselves, to pay each an equal share of the whole debt. or of that pan of it which remains unpaid by the principal debtor."

11. Thus, the liability of the co-surety is co-extensive with that of principal debtor unless it is otherwise provided by the contract. The said principle was also laid down by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature for the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Punyamurthula Venkata Viswa Sundara Rao v. M/s. Margadarsi Chit Fund Pvt. Ltd.I.

12. The aforesaid relevant provisions would reveal that for realization of the amount covered under the arbitration award, respondent No.1 - decree holder has to file an application under Order - XXI Rule I 1 (2) of CPC. Accordingly, respondent No.l had filed the aforesaid execution petition vide E.P.No. 1 76 of 201 8.

13. In Punyamurthula Venkata Viswa Sundara Raor, the Division Bench of this Court on consideration of the arguments '. 2017 (3) ALT 82 (D.8.) l0 KI-,J ( RP No 752 of202J advanced b1' the parties, framed the following two (02) points for consideratioi-r: whether the decree holder has to proceed against alt lhe .judgment debtors, who are guarantors, by claiming proportionate amount decreed. lt. whether the execution Courts in which E.Ps. were t-rled against the present judgment debtors, who are rel ision petitions herein, have jurisdiction to entertain the execution petitions.

14. ()n consideration of the provisions of the Chit Fund Act and thc CI)C, the Division Bench held that the course that has ro be followed bv the decree holder is to mak€ an application to the Registrar lbr execution, to be forwarded to the proper aurhority at the option of the decree holder and the Registrar shall himsclf issue the I certificate and fbrward the said application to the Court or revenue authority, as chosen by the decree holder. The decree holder has an option to procced against either the principal debtor. or any of the guarantors or against all of them. Referring to Section - 12g of the Indian Contract Act, the Division Bench held that the liability of a surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor unless it is otfutoit. provided by the contract. 1 \ I Kl-,J CRP No 752 of2025

15. In Madamanchi Anill Kumar v. Margadarshi Chit Fund Pvt. Limited,2 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 Sundara Raor, held that liability of the sureties is joint and several. The Division Bench also negatived the contention raised by the petitioner therein that a Recovery Certificate issued by the Deputy Registrar of Chits cannot be acted upon, as per Rule - 55 of the Andhra Pradesh Chit Fund Rules, 2008 and that an execution is maintainable only if the recovery certificate has been issued by the Registrar ol Chits to the competent Civil Court.

16. On consideration of the aforesaid provisions and on examination of the facts of the case therein, in Bandi Chandra Hari v. Brindavan Chits Karimnagar India Private Limiteds, this Cou( held that respondent No.l - decree-holder cannot recover double the awarded amount from the petitioner - judgment debtors, and it is entitled for the decretal amount and interest including pendent lite interest as claimed by it aom the judgment debtors. I t

2. CRP No.2338 of 2018, decided on 05.11.2018 t. CRp No.l23z of2024, decided on 03-05.2024 t I 12 KL,J (lRP No 752 of2025

17. Floweveq learned counsel for respondent No.l _ decree_ holder, on instructions, would submit that on receipt of realization of the decretal amount, costs and pendent lite intereit, respondent No.1 will file a full-satisfaction memo before the Executing Court with a request to terminate the proceedings in the subject Ep. It is also clarified that if respondent No.l fails to f.ile full_satisfaction memo, even the Executing Court can terminate the execution proceedings in the subject IIP on its own.

18. [n view of the aforesaid submissions, the prcsent Civil Revision Petition is disposed of directing the Executing Court to follow the procedure laid down under the Indian contract Act and principle laid down in the aforesaid judgments. In the circumstances ofthe case. there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if an1,. pending in I this revision shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// To, '1 . The Junior Crvil Judge, at Huzurabad. < One CC to Mr. Rajesh Bathula, Advocate IOPUCI ? 9n" CC to Mr K Sai Krishna, Adr;;;;'icj;U;i, 4. Two CD Copies karn/gh *,0- )---",' SD,- A.V.S. PRASAD UTY REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER I HIGH COURT DATED:28103,t2025 I I ORDER CRP.No.752 <tf 2025 J+ It J c (, i f '! 2 5 APH 2ir25 0Espp { DISPOSING OF THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION u 1