THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.588 of 2010 ORDER: The first respondent filed O.S.No.680 of 2001 in the Court of IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa, against the petitioner for recovery of amount. The suit was decreed on 29.08.2005. After the decree became final, the first respondent filed E.P.No.362 of 2009 under Order 21 Rule 48 C.P.C. for attachment of salary of the petitioner. The same was ordered and the E.P. was allowed on 31.10.2009 directing that the salary, of the petitioner to the extent of Rs.2,000/- per month, be attached. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the same. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner offered to pay the amount of Rs.2000/- directly to the first respondent, instead of attachment, but the said request was acceded to, by the Executing Court. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the first respondent. The effort of the first respondent is to get the salary of the petitioner attached and recover a sum of Rs.2000/- per month. If the petitioner is offering to pay that very amount without the necessity of attachment, there should not be any plausible objection either for the Executing Court or for the first respondent. Hence the Civil Revision Petition is partly allowed modifying the order under revision to the effect that the petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.2000/- directly to the first respondent on or before 10th of every month as directed by this Court through its interim order dated 19.02.2010 till the entire decree is satisfied. If the petitioner defaults for two consecutive months, the attachment of salary shall be revived. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J 11th June, 2010 Js.