IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 25TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 19448 of 2009(O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN EP. 18 /2009 IN OS.173/2007 of MUNSIFF COURT, CHANGANACHERRY .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- P.M.MATHAI, S/O.MARKOSE, PODIMATTATHIL, PATHAMUTTOM KARA, KOTTAYAM. ( PEON, GOVERNMENT U.P.SCHOOL, CHEERAMCHIRA. BY ADV. MR.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- N.K.AJAYA KUMAR, S/O.K.P.KUMARAN, NILAKKAKKATTIL, MUTTOM PO, MUTTOM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.19448/2009 O APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION. P2: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER. P3: COPY OF THE SALARY CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER. P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 16/06/2009 IN E.P.NO.18/2009. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.19448 of 2009 - O --------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P.No.18 of 2009 in O.S.No.173 of 2007 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Changanassery. The decree executed is one in a suit for money. The execution court has passed Ext.P4 order directing attachment of Rs.3,000/- from the salary of the petitioner to discharge the decree debt. Propriety and correctness of Ext.P4 order is challenged in the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. Though notice was served on the respondent/decree holder he has not entered appearance. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Inviting my attention to Ext.P3 salary particulars of the petitioner, learned counsel submitted, the amount ordered to be deducted at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month from the salary is in excess of the amount that can be attached under the Rules. W.P.(C).No.19448 of 2009 - O 2 The total emoluments enjoyed by the petitioner, according to his counsel, as shown in Ext.P3 certificate is only Rs.9,619/-. His take home salary, it is submitted, is hardly Rs.4,727/-. The learned counsel therefore sought indulgence of this Court for reduction of the amount ordered to be attached from his salary. 4. Having regard to the submissions made and the facts and circumstances presented, I find that a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month alone need be attached from the salary of the petitioner. The order of the court below shall stand modified accordingly. Writ petition is closed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-