M/S OTARMAL KANTILAL and CO vs ULLHAS SHANKAR NAIK AND ANR

Judgment text excerpt

HMK 1 26. FA-95-2012.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY Digitally SAYYED SAEED signed by SAYYED SAEED ALI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ALI AHMED ALI Date: AHMED 2025.11.06 ALI 11:00:15 +0530 FIRST APPEAL NO. 95 OF 2012 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 215 OF 2012 M/s. Otarmal Kantilal & Co. ….Appellant/Applicant Versus Ullhas Shankar Naik & Anr. .…Respondents __________________________________________________________________ Mr. Darshit K. Jain i/by Ms. Divya D. Jain a/w. Ms. Arushi Gandhi for Appellant/Applicant. None for Respondents. __________________________________________________________________ CORAM : JITENDRA JAIN, J. DATED : 04th NOVEMBER 2025 ORDER : 1. This First Appeal was admitted on 18 th April, 2012. None appears for the Respondents today. 2. The Appeal challenges an order dated 19 th October, 2011 passed by the City Civil Court in Execution Application No.454 of 2009 in Summary Suit No. 1052 of 2009. 3. The issue which arises in this appeal is whether the garnishee is justified in contending, that the amount lying to the credit of the judgment debtor on the date of warrant of attachment is only required to be paid to the decree-holder or whether any amount subsequent thereto is also required to be paid till the decree is satisfied. 4. The Appellant had filed an original suit against Respondent Nos.1 and 2 for recovery of certain sum of money. On 07 th July, 2009 an ex parte decree was obtained by the Appellant against Respondent Nos.1 and 2. The decretal amount was Rs.52,205/- with further interest at 14% per annum HMK 2 26. FA-95-2012.doc on Rs.50,000/- from the date of filing of the suit until payment. 5. Respondent No.1 was employed with Respondent No.3 and, therefore, a warrant of attachment came to be issued on 22 nd July, 2009 by the Registra