SREEDHARAN Vs. KRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision petitioner is the judgment-debtor in E.P. 290/84 in O.S. 827/79 of the Munsiff Court, Sherthallai. Respondents (Plaintiffs) filed the E.P. to attach the salary of the judgment-debtor at the rate of Rs. 70/- per month. Revision petitioner filed objections stating that no amount of salary is attachable. He produced his salary certificate. On going through it the learned Munsiff found that salary of the revision petitioner is liable to attachment at the rate of Rs. 70/- per month.

(2.) Counsel for the revision petitioner contended that the Court below was not at all justified in holding that Rs. 70/- can be attached. It is pointed out that under S. 60(1)(kb) of the C.P.C. all moneys payable under a policy of insurance on the life of the judgment-debtor are not liable to be attached and the Court below patently overlooked the above provision. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that what has been exempted from attachment is only the amount payable under the policy to the insured and this does not at all mean that the monthly contributions paid to the insurer should be deducted from the salary to decide how much amount could be attached. Counsel contended that the intention of the legislature in enacting the provision is to see that the amount paid towards the insurance should not be attached and this is evident from a reading of the provision. S. 60(1 )(kb) makes it clear that all moneys payable under the policy of insurance on the life of the judgment-debtor are not liable to attachment. It is difficult to read into the above provision to hold that monthly contributions paid to the policy of insurance are not liable to attachment. In other words, the amount contributed monthly to the policy of insurance cannot be deducted from the salary of a judgment-debtor to decide the amount that can be attached from it.

(3.) In Kousalya Devi v. Praveen Bankers, 1979 Ker LT 932 this Court considered whether amount contributed to Provident Fund can be attached. In the above decision it has been held that only after the contribution goes into the fund exemption under clause (k) is available and therefore the contribution which a person has agreed to make towards Provident Fund cannot be excluded in reckoning the attachable portion of the salary. Similar is the position with regard to contribution payable to insurance.