THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1956 OF 2011 ORDER: 1. The Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 15.4.2011 in E.P. No.4 of 2010 in O.S. No.61 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri, whereunder and whereby attachment warrant was issued attaching salary of the petitioner/judgment debtor in accordance with law subject to Section 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’). 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that salary of the petitioner was already attached and the said attachment is in force, and that unless a period of 24 months is completed, second attachment is not permissible under Section 60 CPC, and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 3. Section 60 CPC deals with Property liable to attachment and sale in execution of decree. Clause (i) of Proviso to Section 60 CPC reads thus: “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 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.” A bare perusal of the above provision makes it clear that when there is continuous or intermittent attachment for 24 months, such portion shall be exempt from attachment and after expiry of 12 months thereafter, second attachment is maintainable in the same decree. In view of the fact that the decree in this case is entirely different, the respondent/decree holder can as well attach the salary provided it comes under the exemption clause under Section 60 CPC. Therefore, to safeguard the interest of the petitioner, the executing court attached his salary subject to Section 60 CPC, and the said order needs no interference. 4. The Civil Revision Petition is devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. --------------------- (K.C.Bhanu, J.) 08.06.2011 DRK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1956 OF 2011 08.06.2011 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1956 OF 2011 08.06.2011 Between: Vaddi Rama Mohan Prasad …Petitioner And Mallela Venkataramanna …Respondent