# Attachment of moneys deposited in treasury

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 10
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1960-12-07
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 10
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/attachment-of-moneys-deposited-in-treasury-163294
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

218
Attachment of moneys deposited in treasury
G.L. No. 1/86 dated 2nd January, 1915

The rule governing the attachment of moneys held in deposit in Government
treasuries under the orders of a court of departmental officer, relates to ―property in the
custody of a court or public officer‖(rule 52, Order XXI, Code of Civil Procedure). The
treasury officer is, qua the deposit, merely the agent of the depositing court or officer, and
therefore, the deposit held by the treasury officer is in the ―custody‖ of the court or
officer by whose order it was made. District Judges should, therefore, ensure that civil
courts do not issue warrants of attachment to treasury officers, but to the court or public
officer by whose orders the money is held in deposit by the treasury officer.
Attachment of pay
C.L. No. 10 dated 20th January, 1958
The directions contained in notification no. SRO-F. 19(1)-E-57, dated the 24th
September, 1957, of the Government of India, forwarded to all District Judges with the
C.L. noted in the bloc should be complied with in issuing notices attaching salaries and
allowances of government servants employed in the aforesaid Ministry.
C.E. No. 18/VII-d-13 dated 21st February, 1961

As clarified in Government of India letter no. 22/56-60 Judl., date December 7,
1960 sent with the marginally noted C.E. pay and allowances of all personnel subject to
Army/Navy/Air Force Acts are immune from attachment under section 28/20/28, thereof.
Section 60(I) C.P.C. also makes similar provision. While passing decrees against
Army/Navy/Air force personnel, these provisions must be kept in view.
C.E. No. 12/ VII-d-13, dated 22nd January, 1964
Under Government of India, Home Department (Judicial notification no. 186/37-July,
dated the 2nd October, 1946 as amended up to July, 1963 the following allowances
payable to any public officer in the service of the Central Government or any servant of a
Federal Railway or a cantonment authority or of the port authority or major port shall be
exempt from attachment in pursuance of clause (1), sub-section (1) of section 60, C.P.C.:-
(1)
All kinds of traveling allowance.
(2)
All kinds of conveyance allowances.
(3)
All allowances granted for meeting the cost of
(a)
uniform, and
(b)
rations
(4)
All allowances granted as compensation for higher cost of living in localities
considered by Government to be expensive localities including hill stations.
(5)
All house rent allowances.
(6)
All allowances granted to provide relief against the increased cost of living.
(7)
A foreign allowance or, in the case of head of Diplomatic Missions, frais de
representation assigned to officer serving in post abroad.
(8)
Children's Education allowance allowed under the Office Memorandum no.
10(I)-Est. (spl.) 60 of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance,
dated 30th June, 1962 as amendment from time to time.
219
This is beside the exemption of the first two hundred rupees and one half of the
remainder of the salary granted under C.P.C. Amendment Act (no.26) of 1963.
C.E. No. 51 dated 7th September, 1964
District Judges and additional District Judges have been asked to impress upon
the court functioning under them to give effect to the amended provision of section 60
C.P.C.
C.L. No. 48 dated 22nd September, 1967
Presiding Officers should follow the instructions contained in Court's C.L. No.
9/VII-f-181, dated January 23, 1959, and not attach the Provident Fund amounts standing
to the credit of the employees as it is in contravention of the provision of section 10 of the
Employee's Provident Fund Act, 1952.
Execution proceedings against government servants
C.L. No. 38/VIII-b-10 dated 9th June, 1950 read with
G.L. No. 44/180-33(3) dated 5th September, 1935
The correct procedure to be followed by the executing court in cases in which a
decree against a government servant is sought to be executed by his arrest is that a notice
of the intended arrest of the judgment- debtor, should be addressed and sent to the Head
of the Office where the judgment -debtor may be employed, mentioning the probable
date when a warrant for his arrest is likely to be issued. The Head of the Office should in
no case be asked to suspend the government servant concerned.
Awarding of costs
G.L. No. 2031, dated 30th June, 1897

In many cases it happens that an application for execution fails owing to the fault
of the decree-holder, and in all such cases he should himself be made to bear all the
charges to which the judgment-debtor may have been put owing to the decree-holder's
fault or neglect. Among others, the following may be mentioned as cases in which the
decree-holder should not be allowed to recover his costs from the judgment-debtor :
(1)
When the decree-holder allows an application to be struck off for want of
prosecution.
(2)
When the decree-holder puts in an application which the court considers to
be unnecessary.
(3)
When the application is defective and is consequently disallowed.
(4)
When two separate applications are put in, but the subject-matter of the
second application might reasonably have been included in the first
application.
(5)
When the application is made for execution against property with which
the judgment-debtor has no concern.
Persistent neglect to exercise proper discretion in the awarding of costs in cases of
this kind on the part of a presiding officer will be taken notice of by the High Court.