Wife challenged dismissal of her application to attach her husband's salary for maintenance arrears. The executing court had found he was paying installments. The High Court saw no ground to intervene and observed attachment power may be exercised if exigency arises.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CR No. 11 of 2024
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondent
CAUSE TITLE TAKEN FROM CIS PERIPHERY
For Petitioner : Ms. Madhunisha Singh, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board
22.01.2024
1. Default pointed out by the Registry is ignored.
2. Heard.
3. This Civil Revision has been preferred against the order dated 02.09.2023 passed in Case No.485/2022 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Janjgir District JanjgirChampa (C.G) whereby, an application for recovery of maintenance amount granted by this Court vide order dated 13.10.2022 passed in FA(MAT) No.65/2020 by way of attaching the salary of the respondent/non-applicant, has been dismissed.
4. Perusal of the impugned order would show that the
2
Executing Court has observed that the judgment debtor/husband is paying the monthly maintenance of the arrears in installments. In view of the above, the Executing Court did not find it appropriate to take recourse to Order 21 Rule 48 C.P.C.
5. Further, considering the manner in which the deposits are being made, this Court does not find it appropriate to intervene with the impugned order and the said Court may exercise such power, as and when such exigency arises, to recover the amount invoking the said provision. Ordered accordingly.
6. With the aforesaid observation, this Petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge
Priyanka
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Family Court rightly declined to attach the husband's salary under Order 21 Rule 48 CPC for recovery of maintenance arrears when he was paying in installments.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Pushpa Kashyap
Omkar Kashyap
Deepak Kumar Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
