THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5392 of 2011 ORDER: Respondent No.1 filed O.S.No.41 of 2009 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Darsi against respondent Nos.2 to 5 and the petitioner for recovery of an amount covered by a chit. Respondent No.2 was the prized subscriber and the petitioner (Defendant No.3) and respondent Nos.3 to 5 were guarantors. The suit was decreed ex parte on 14.10.2009. Respondent No.1 filed E.P.No.38 of 2010 with a prayer to attach the salaries of the petitioner and respondent No.3 herein (judgment debtors 2 and 3). An order of attachment was passed by the trial Court on 25.02.2011. The petitioner states that soon after coming to know the ex parte decree, he filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. with a petition to condone the delay in filing the same. He pleads that the steps taken by respondent No.1 are mala fide, since no steps were initiated against the principal debtor, respondent No.2 herein, though she is also an employee. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent No.1. Of late, it has become rampant for the chit fund companies to proceed against the guarantors without taking any steps against the prized subscribers or the principal debtors. Though it is competent for a decree-holder to proceed against any of the judgment debtors, the propriety warrants that it is only when the steps initiated against the principal debtor are not fruitful that the guarantors, may be proceeded against. Further, whenever an application filed under order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. is pending for setting aside an ex parte decree, the executing Court must not proceed with the E.P. At any rate, when an important step of attachment of salary is resorted to, the executing Court ought to have issued notice to the petitioner herein. Hence, the civil revision petition is allowed and the order under revision is set aside. It is directed that the application filed by the petitioner for condonation of delay in filing the application to set aside the decree shall be taken up, if it is otherwise in order and the E.P. shall not be proceeded till the disposal of the said application. It is also made clear that it shall be open to respondent No.1 to proceed against respondent No.2 straightaway. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.09.12.2011. kdl