This revision has been filed seeking to call for the records in E.P.No.104 of 2015 in O.S.No.222 of 2010, dated 29.8.2016, on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Thoothukudi and to set aside the same.
2.The Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.222 of 2010 and Judgement- Debtor in E.P.No.104 of 2015.The first respondent is the plaintiff and the second respondent is the third party. The suit was filed for recovery of money and the said suit was decreed on 11.6.2013.The First respondent/Decree- holder filed E.P.No.104 of 2015 to attach the salary of the petitioner to release the decreetal amount. The Petitioner has stated that he has filed an application to set aside the ex-parte decree. He has not produced the order of stay granted by the appellate Court or any order setting aside the ex- parte decree.
3.The learned Trial Judge after considering the decree and the fact that the appellate Court has not granted any order of stay, passed orders attaching the salary of the Petitioner. Against that the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.
4.The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the decree is an ex-parte decree and he has filed a Petition to set aside the ex-parte decree and the said application is pending in the very same Court, without being numbered. The learned counsel for the Petitioner made submissions on merits of the case also.
5.The learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that the decree passed in O.S.No.222 of 2010 is an exparte order and the Petitioner has not filed any application or not taken any steps to get the ex-parte decree set aside. The learned counsel would further submit that this Court by order dated 7.12.2016, granted interim order on condition to deposit a sum of Rs.1 lakh within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the Petitioner has not deposited any amount and hence prayed for dismissal of the Civil Revision Petition.
6.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.
7.E.P is filed by the first respondent to release the amounts as per the decree by attaching the salary of the Petitioner. The Petitioner entered appearance in the E.P and has not given any reason as to why his salary should not be attached. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted before the execution Court that the Petitioner filed application to set aside the ex-parte decree and the said application is kept pending without even numbering. The Petitioner has not taken any effective steps for getting the application numbered. Further, the Petitioner failed to comply with the conditional order passed by this Court on 7.10.2016. The learned Judge has ordered attachment on the ground that the execution Court cannot go beyond the decree. Hence this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order of the Court below, warranting interference by this Court.
8.Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petition filed by him to set aside the ex-parte decree is pending without even numbering, the learned Trial Judge is directed to number the same, if it is otherwise in order and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed. No costs.
To
1.The Sub-ordinate Judge, Thoothukudi.
2.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
.