Sneh Lata vs Krishna Devi

Mr. Shekher Dhawan, J.—Present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is challenge to the order dated 11.2.2015 [Annexure P/1] passed by Civil Judge [Senior Division], Bathinda whereby salary of the petitioner was attached in a suit for recovery.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per provisions of Section 60(1)(i) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, ⅓rd salary can be attached whereas the Executing Court has ordered attachment of ⅔rd of salary and as such, the same is liable to be set aside.

Learned counsel for the respondent while arguing on the point submitted that the respondent is concerned about the satisfaction of lawful decree having been passed against the petitioner and for that purpose, he had sought help of the Court.

Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that most of the facts are not disputed that decree was passed on 21.1.2014 in a suit for recovery. As per provisions of Section 60 CPC, salary to the extent of ⅓rd of the first One thousand rupees and ⅔rd of the remainder can be attached. For ready reference, the relevant provisions of Section 60 are extracted below:-

Property liable to attachment and sale in execution of decree.- (1) The following property is liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree, namely, lands, houses or other buildings, goods, money, bank notes cheques, bills of exchange, hundis, promissory notes, Government securities, bonds or other securities for money, debts, shares in a corporation and, save as hereinafter mentioned, all other saleable property, movable or immovable, belonging to the judgment debtor, or over which, or the profits of which, he has a disposing power which he may exercise for his own benefit, whether the same be held in the name of the judgment debtor or by another person in trust for him or on his behalf:

Provided that the following particulars shall not be liable to such attachment or sale, namely:-

(a) to h) xx xx xx

(i) salary to the extent of the first one thousand rupees and two-thirds of the remainder in execution of any decree other than a decree for maintenance:

Provided that where any part of such portion of the salary as is liable to attachment has been under attachment, whether continuously or intermittently, for a total period of twenty four months, such portion shall be exempt from attachment until the expiry of a further period of twelve months, and, where such attachment has been made in execution of one and the same decree, shall, after the attachment has continued for a total period of twenty four months, be finally exempt from attachment in execution of that decree;"

In the present case, the decree is not a decree for maintenance, but is a decree passed in a suit for recovery and the provisions of Section 60(1)(i) CPC shall be operative and the Court below has misread the relevant provision. As such the order dated 11.2.2015 [Annexure P/1] stands set-aside and the present petition is disposed of with a direction that the Executing Court shall proceed with the satisfaction of the decree as per relevant provisions incorporated under Section 60(1)(i) CPC. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.