THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1507 OF 2009 Dated: 24.01.2011 Between: Devabhaktuni Rameshbabu ..... Petitioner AND Balla Veera Naga Lingeswararao & Anr. .....Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. Nageswara Rao CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1507 OF 2009 ORDER This revision petition is filed against the Order in E.P. No. 250 of 2007 in O.S. No. 314 of 2005 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada . The decree-holder has obtained a decree for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,24,595/- and execution of the decree sought for the attachment of the salary of the J.D.R. No.2. After the notice of attachment was served, the concerned department has informed that there are about five attachments against the salary of the J.D.R. No.2. The J.D.R. also claimed that there are four attachments against her salary, they are (1) in E.P. No. 509 of 2002 in O.S. No. 1042 of 1998; (2) in E.P. No. 164 of 2007 in O.S. No. 107 of 2004; (3) in E.P. No. 224 of 2007 in O.S. No. 402 of 2004 and (4) E.P. No. 792 of 2004 in O.S. No. 228 of 2004. The lower Court accepted the contention of the J.D.R. that since the attachments are pending, the further attachment is against the provisions of Section 60 CPC. But as can be seen from the endorsement of the Assistant Director, Administration, Government General Hospital, Kakinada, the E.Ps. referred to by the J.D.R. were satisfied except E.P. No. 224 of 2007, which is said to be not traced. So far as the other three E.Ps are concerned, they have been completed by 2008. In fact, the endorsement shows that with effect from March 2008, the attachment was effective in this E.P and the same will be completed by the end of February 2011. Therefore, from the above endorsement, there are no subsisting attachments over the salary of the J.D.R. and on other hand, it shows that the garnishee has effected the attachment of the salary with effect from March 2008. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, the dismissal of the E.P. by the lower Court is without verification of the facts and the lower Court order suffers from infirmity. The Order of the lower Court is therefore set aside and the lower Court is directed to verify whether the attachment is subsisting as informed by the Assistant Director, Administration, Government General Hospital, Kakinada, in the letter dated 17.10.2008. If the amounts were realized, they shall be paid to the decree-holder. If for any reason, the attachment was not effective, the decree-holder is at liberty to proceed against the salary of the J.D.R. Accordingly, the revision is disposed of. No costs. ______________________ N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO, J Date: 24.01.2011 tsk