PAPPACHAN Vs. ORIENTAL KURIES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) What is the nature and character of the amounts realised by attachment of the salary of the judgment debtor in execution of a decree for money beyond the permissible period of twenty four months? The learned single Judge has referred the Civil Revision Petitions filed by the judgment debtor to the Division Bench for an authoritative pronouncement on this vexed question.

(2.) The decree for money in O.S.No.258/1989 on the file of the court of the Subordinate Judge of Thrissur was put into execution in E.P.No.601/1993 for attachment of the salary of the judgment debtors. The attachment of the salary of 306 2017(2) Kerala Law Times the second judgment debtor ceased after 24 months even though the attachment of the salary of the first judgment debtor continued beyond. It transpires that a sum of Rs. 15,920.00 is lying in court deposit towards the amount collected for the period exceeding 24 months for which rival claims have now been made. The decree holder has filed E.P.No.343/2004 to recover the said amount by attachment whereas the first judgment debtor has filed C.A.No.67/2001 for refund of the amount collected in excess.

(3.) The execution court though has dismissed E.P.No.343/2004 held that the decree holder can withdraw the amount on the ground that the amount deposited in excess has now 'become part of the decree debt'. The execution court has on the same reasoning held that the first judgment debtor is not entitled to get refund of the amount deposited in excess and dismissed C.A.No.67/2001. The separate orders passed in E.P.No.343/2004 and C.A.No.67/2001 are challenged in these Civil Revision Petitions under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.