THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2088 OF 2007 DATED: 01-07-2010 Between: Oriental Insurance Company, C.B.O.7, 669, Rep.by its Branch Manager, Annasalai. ..... PETITIONER And B.Padmavathamma & 6 others. .....RESPONDENTS ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 08-02-2007, in E.P.No.9 of 2005 in O.P.No.114 of 1999 on the file of the learned District Judge, Anantapur, wherein the executing Court overruled the objection raised by the petitioner herein-2nd judgment- debtor-Insurance company and directed to deposit the amount of Rs.13,513/-, which was earlier deducted by the company towards income tax under the ‘Tax Deduction Scheme’. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. Respondents 1 to 4 herein were the claimants, who filed O.P.114 of 1999 for compensation. After enquiry, the O.P. was allowed, awarding compensation of Rs.2,40,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a. and costs. The judgment-debtor made a part-payment of Rs.3,43,328/- on 07-05-2004 and withheld an amount of Rs.13,004/- towards deduction of income tax. The decree-holders- claimants filed the said E.P. for recovery of the said amount of Rs.13,004/- and also costs of Rs.509/- making up total of Rs.13,513/-. The 2nd judgment-debtor-insurer filed a counter in the executing Court contending that the income tax over the interest component is liable to be deducted at source. The decree-holders-claimants resisted the same contending that no deduction towards income tax can be made on the payment made towards compensation and damages for mental agony and also contending that the executing Court cannot go beyond the decree and the judgment-debtors are liable to satisfy the decree, which has become final. 4. The executing Court, relying upon the decision of the apex Court in HARYANA UNION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY v. DR. ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL [1], held that the executing Court cannot go beyond the decree and it is open to the decree-holder to recover the amount due towards income tax by approaching the competent authority and they cannot unilaterally make a deduction of income tax from the decretal amount. 5. The executing Court has rightly observed in the impugned order that the decree having become final, judgment-debtors are bound to comply with the same and pay the amounts as per the award and the executing Court cannot go beyond the decree or modify the same. The impugned order of the executing Court does not call for any interference and there are absolutely no merits in this petition. 6. In the result, Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. Interim stay granted on 08-06-2007 shall stand vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 01st July, 2010. Tsy [1] 2004(1) DECISIONS TODAY (SC) 813