LawforAll

Showing posts with label 34. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 34. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 4, 2012

filed EA.No.217 of 2010 for attachment of the EP amount of Rs.1,34,000/- from out of Rs.5 lakhs receivable by the petitioner towards the gratuity, arrears of salary and leave encashment pertaining to her husband = The deceased judgment debtor was a teacher in the Government school and was, hence, a Government Employee. After his death, the petitioner herein was impleaded as the respondent in EP.No.81 of 2010. Pending the EP, respondent No.1/decree holder filed EA.No.217 of 2010 for attachment of the EP amount of Rs.1,34,000/- from out of Rs.5 lakhs receivable by the petitioner towards the gratuity, arrears of salary and leave encashment pertaining to her husband. The said application was allowed by the lower Court by the impugned Order. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner."Admittedly the gratuity amount is now in the hands of the Department. It is difficult to say that at the time when the attachment was sought the amount of gratuity is held by the Department in trust for the judgment-debtor, because now the judgment-debtor is dead and no one can have property in trust for a dead person. True once the property was held by the Department perhaps in trust for the deceased wife of the 2nd respondent. But, when once she died, it is difficult to hold that again the property is held by the Department in trust for the deceased wife. Then what is the character of the property held by the Department. We feel that it can only be a debt to be paid to the legal representatives of the deceased. Being the legal representatives of the deceased, they have got a claim to get the amount which was earned by the deceased wife of the 2nd respondent as gratuity. Since it is only a debt in the hands of the Department, there is nothing wrong in attaching the property for realization of the amount due from the judgment debtor. It cannot be disputed that the amount that can be now realized by the Department from the legal representatives is not an asset of the deceased. Assets of the deceased are liable to the debts of the deceased. If the assets came in the possession of the legal representatives or if the assets are held by some person for the legal representatives of the deceased, the properties are liable to be attached." -Admittedly, in the present case, the judgment debtor, who is a Government servant, has died and the gratuity and other amounts payable to him were sought to be recovered from his wife, who is his legal representative. Having regard to the Division Bench judgment of the Kerala High Court (cited supra), with which I am in agreement, I do not find any merit in the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Civil Revision Petition No.3537 of 2011 26-03-2012 Sake Gurumurthy (died) per LRs Sm...