Civil Revision No. 2221 of 2009 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2221 of 2009 Date of decision: 6.05.2009. Smt. Chameli Petitioner Versus Sube Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Brijeshwar Singh, Advocate for Mr. Govind Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.S.Dalal, Advocate for the respondent ***** S.D.ANAND, J. The respondent-Sube Singh is in employment at the Bhapoli Primary Cooperative Agriculture and Rural Development Ltd. Bank, Bhapoli. It is apparent from the record that when the Process Server went over to effect the service upon him, the officer in-charge made a report that he was on casual leave on that date. Thereafter, the Process Server went over to the residence of the respondent- Sube Singh where mother of that respondent informed the former that the respondent was having pain in his chest. However, she refused to accept the service. In that view of the matter, a copy of summons and grounds of petition was affixed at his homestead. It is deemed to be sufficient service. The challenge in this petition is to the impugned order Civil Revision No. 2221 of 2009 -2- **** dated 7.2.2009 which reads as under:- “In the present case, it has been almost admitted by the parties to the case that the payment as per order of Hon'ble High Court has been received upto 31.01.2009 from 16.08.2005 and it has also been agreed by both the Ld. Counsel for the parties that the amount of Rs.1338/- was given in excess to the DH and that amount will be subject to the adjustment. Now the amount of Rs.2200/- would be paid from February onward till retirement of the JD. Therefore, this execution petition stands disposed of as per statements of both the Ld. Counsel for the parties at bar. File be consigned to the record room.” Sube Singh, JD had admittedly retired from the service of the respondent bank, and in that view of things, the bank cannot be compelled to pay the maintenance pendente-lite out of the salary of Sube Singh. The learned counsel for the decree holder argues that the respondent bank may be restrained from disbursing the retiral benefits to Sube Singh, JD. The allowance of the request is not feasible. It is averred at the trial that Sube Singh would not be entitled to any pension. The provident fund has to be paid by the GPF authorities. Even otherwise, the withholding of the retiral benefits is not in order. Learned counsel for the petitioner has a grievance that the tenor of the impugned order suggests that the maintenance Civil Revision No. 2221 of 2009 -3- **** pendente-lite would be payable only till the retirement of Sube Singh, JD. It would be apparent from a perusal of the impugned order that no such inference is drawable. All that the impugned order states in the relevant part thereof is that the amount of arrears of maintenance pendente lite shall be deducted by the bank employer out of the salary of Sube Singh, JD till the retirement of the latter. The liability of JD shall continue to subsist. If he wants an order on point of dilution of maintenance pendente-lite, he may approach the learned Trial Court which, if approached, could quantify the maintenance pendente-lite during the post-retirement period of the judgment debtor. The petition shall stand disposed of accordingly. May 06, 2009 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge