ORDER
1. There is an execution petition pending before the trial Court. It was listed on 26th March, 1999 on which date the judgment-debtor’s Counsel represented that the decree had been attached in OS No.3 of 1999 by Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur, therefore the execution proceedings be stayed. It was objected to by the other side. The learned trial Court refused to stay the execution of the decree. He found that the attachment order passed under Order 21, Rule 53 CPC does not amount to stay within the meaning of Section 15 of the Limitation Act, therefore, he directed further proceedings in the execution petition and asked the judgment-debtor to adduce his evidence. This order is challenged by way of this revision.
2. It will be profitable to quote Rule 53 of Order 21 CPC:
“53. (1) Where the property to be attached is a decree, either for the payment of money or for sale in enforcement of a mortgage or charge, the attachment shall be made-
(a) if the decrees were passed by the same Court, then by order of such Court, and
(b) if the decree sought to be attached was passed by another Court, then by the issue to such other Court of a notice by the Court which passed the decree sought to be executed, requesting such other Court to stay the execution of its decree unless and until-
(i) the Court which passed the decree sought to be executed cancels the notice, or
(ii)(a) the holder of the decree sought to be executed, or
(b) his judgment-debtor with the previous consent in writing of such decree holder, or with the permission of the attaching Court, applies to the Court receiving such notice to execute the aliened decree”.
(2) Where a Court makes an order under clause (a) of sub-rule (1), or received an application under sub-head (ii) of clause (b) of the said sub-rule, it shall, on the application of the creditor who has attached the decree or his judgment-debtor, proceed to execute the attached decree and apply the net proceeds in satisfaction of the decree sought to be executed.
(3) The holder of a decree sought to be executed by the attachment of another decree of the nature specified in sub-rule (1) shall be deemed to be the representative of the holder of the attached decree and to be entitled to execute such attached decree in any manner lawful for the holder thereof.
(4) Where the property to be attached in the execution of a decree is a decree other than a decree of the nature referred to in sub-rule (1), the attachment shall be made, by a notice by the Court which passed the decree sought to be executed, to the holder of the decree sought to be attached, prohibiting him from transferring or charging the same in any way; and, where such decree has been passed by any other Court, also by sending to such other Court a notice to abstain from executing the decree sought to be attached until such notice is cancelled by the Court from which it was sent.
(5) The holder of a decree attched under this rule shall give the Court executing the decree such information and aid as may reasonably be required.
(6) On the application of the holder of a decree sought to be executed by the attachment of another decree, the Court making an order of attachment under this Rule shall give notice of such order to the judgment-debtor bound by the decree attached; and no payment or adjustment of the attached decree made by the judgment debtor in contravention of such order with knowledge thereof or after receipt of notice thereof, either through the Court or otherwise, shall be recognised by any Court os long as the attachment remains in force.
3. Sub-rule (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 53 clearly lays down that the executing Court has to stay the execution unless and until the conditions laid down in sub-rule (b)(i) or (b)(ii)(a) or (b) are met. The issue whether the execution has to be stayed or not can be seen from the Rule 53 itself which makes it clear that once a request is made by another Court for attachment of decree the Court in which the execution is pending has to stay the execution till certain conditions are met.
4. Various judgments have been cited at the Bar, but the issue has been conclusively decided by a Full Bench of this Court in Rama Rao v. Ranganayakulu, (FB). The Court while relying upon the judgment of Privy Council in Mahalingam Chettiar v. Ratnanathan Chettiar, ILR 1941 Mad. 1 = AIR 1940 PC 173, held that;
“an attachment under Rule 53(1)(b) is only in the shape of a request and it does not purport to prohibit the Court to which it is addressed from executing the decree unless the conditions contained in the request were fulfilled and the purpose of the request was to see that the holder of the decree did not himself proceed to execution without the leave of the Court
making the attachment; in other words, the object of this rule is to prevent the holder of the attached decree from realising and taking away the fruits of the decree and to enable the attaching creditor or creditors to come to the Court which passed the decree to apply for execution and thus to safeguard the interests of the attaching creditors also.”
5. It was further held that, a judgment creditor who succeeded in attaching the decree could apply to the Court for execution of the decree without obtaining the concurrence or consent of the other attaching creditors. Sub-rule (b) of Rule 53(1) of Order 21, according to the judgment of the Full Bench prescribes period during which the stay remains operative, that is till the notice is cancelled by the attaching Court or till the attaching creditor and the holder of the decree sought the decree to be executed or with his consent his judgment debtor applied to the Court for execution.
6. Applying the judgment of Full Bench, it becomes abundantly clear that, once a request is made under Order 21, Rule 53 CPC by a Court to attach a decree the executing Court has no option but to stay the decree till the Court is approached in the ways in which it is prescribed under sub-rule (1) to Rule 53.
7. For these reasons, I find that the order passed by the learned trial Court cannot be allowed to sustain. It is accordingly set aside.
8. The revision is accordingly disposed of.