IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2008 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1929 CRP.No. 267 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28/02/2008 IN EP.24 /2008 IN OS.596/2005 of MUNSIFF COURT, KARUNAGAPPALLY .................... REVN. PETITIONERS: JUDGMENT DEBTORS 2 & 3/DEFENDANTS 2 & 3 --------------------------------------------------------- 1. RAGHAVAN VIJAYAN, KALLUMMOOTTIL VEEDU, MARUTHOORKULANGARA THEKKUM MURI, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 2. KUMARAN SAJEEVAN, L.D.CLERK, KARUNAGAPPALLY PANCHAYAT OFFICE, OTTATHENGIL VEEDU, KOZHIKODE MEKKUM MURI, AYANIVELIKULANGARA VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.N.VIMALAN RESPONDENTS: DECREE HOLDER & DEFENDANT NO.1 ------------------------------------------- 1. KUNJUKRISHNA PILLAI, SANKARA PILLAI, KOLADATHU VEEDU, PUNNAKULAM MURI, ADINADU VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 2. R.SUGATHA, KALLUMMOOTTIL VEEDU, MARUTHOORKULANGARA THEKKUM MURI, KARUNAGAPPALLY. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- C.R.P.No.267 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of March, 2008 ORDER This revision petition is preferred against the order of the Munsiff, Karunagappally in E.P.No.24/08 in O.S.No.596/05 whereby the court has directed attachment of Rs.2,000/- each from the salary of judgment debtors 2 and 3. 2. A perusal of the judgment in the suit would reveal that the suit has decreed for an amount of Rs.41,940/- with 12% interest on Rs.37,500/- from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter, at the rate of 6% per annum till realisation. It is also submitted that the defendants are directed to pay the above said decree amount in equal monthly instalments at the rate of Rs.1,000/-. There is a usual default clause as well. Default has been committed, so the decree holder was forced to file an application for execution. The court has ordered attachment of the salary at the rate of Rs.2,000/- from each. It is submitted that the revision petitioners are not having financial capacity and one is full time sweeper having a CRP 267/08 2 carry home salary of Rs.5,612/- and the other is an LD clerk having a carry home salary of Rs.4,940/-. Even applying the principles of attachment from the full time sweeper only Rs.1,503/- can be attached. But, from the LD clerk Rs.2,000/- can be attached. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners would submit that it was on account of the non information, they were not able to pay the instalments but I am not prepared to accept that submission as such. But as submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioners, if the clients are prepared to pay the arrears of instalments, I feel that an opportunity can be given as follows: (i) The revision petitioners are directed to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/- on or before 11.4.2008. (ii) On payment of the said amount, the court can ascertain the view of the decree holders whether the benefit that is granted under the decree can be continued. (iii) In case, the decree holder is not amenable and if the court feel so for valid reason that some time can be CRP 267/08 3 granted it may do so. Till such time, the court below is directed not to proceed with the attachment of the salary. The CRP is disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE csl