Jaka Apparao vs State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 870 AP

 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

               WRIT PETITION NO.3694 OF 2021

ORDER:

This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India seeking the following relief:-

"...... to issue a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the endorsement proceedings in R.C.No.139056/2020-21, dated 11.10.2020 of the 2nd respondent informing the petitioner that there is no information from the Senior Civil Judge for closing the E.P.No.179/2014 in O.S.No.363/2012 and in not paying the death benefits to the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to law and set aside the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to pay all the death benefits belonging to late Narasamma to the petitioner forthwith and pass such other order."

2. It is the case of petitioner that the 2nd respondent through

E-Office No.42004/B3/2019, dated 14.10.2019 directed the

Branch Manager, Corporation Bank, Srikakulam to pay the

balance available to the credit of Provident Fund account of the

deceased Narasamma, Attender by transferring the same to the

account of petitioner and issued an account payee cheque for

Rs.38,513/- towards the Provident Fund. The remaining death

benefits i.e., Gratuity and other amounts were not paid to the

petitioner.

3. Further the decree holder in O.S.No.363/2012 filed

E.P.No.179/2014 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge,

Srikakulam, but the same was closed and he gave an

undertaking that he never filed any suit, petition or E.P or any

litigation for realization of the decretal amount, as the said

Narasamma died. The petitioner approached the Court for issue

of the order passed by the Court closing the E.P and obtained

certified copies of the orders, more particularly the order dated

17.07.2015, but the respondents did not pay death benefits of

said Narasamma to this petitioner and requested to declare the

inaction of the respondents in paying death benefits of said

Narasamma to the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary.

4. It is the case of petitioner in specific that the decree

holder is no other than the brother of the deceased Narasamma

and he himself gave an undertaking that he never filed any suit

or E.P for realization of the amount. As seen from the material

available on record, E.P.No.179/2014 in O.S.No.363/2012 on

the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Srikakulam is

pending, a notice under Order XXII Rule 48 CPC was ordered

and it was served to the judgment debtor as there is a direction

to the garnishee to attach the amount for realization of the

decree debt and the attachment was made absolute by order

dated 17.07.2015, while closing the E.P. Therefore, the

Principal Senior Civil Judge, Srikakulam furnished the

information as requested by this petitioner and the said order

itself shows that the E.P is closed, but the petitioner is under

the impression that closure of E.P is sufficient to terminate the

proceedings. Termination of E.P is different from closure.

Closure of E.P is only for the limited purpose, but recovery shall

continue till realization and it is deemed to be continued till

recovery of entire amount in terms of Section 60 CPC.

5. If really, the decree holder is not prosecuting the

proceedings, it is for the judgment debtor to file appropriate

application before the executing Court under Order XXI Rule

2 CPC for recording full satisfaction and the Court can

terminate the E.P proceedings, and on such termination, the

petitioner can recover the amount from the concerned

authority, but at this stage, this Court cannot declare the

proceedings in R.C.No.139056/2020-21, dated 11.10.2020

issued by the 2nd respondent, as illegal and arbitrary and for

consequential direction, let the petitioner and the decree holder

appear before the Court and file appropriate application before

the executing Court for recording full satisfaction. If the decree

holder received any amount in full satisfaction, on filing such

application, the executing Court can record full satisfaction

subject to its satisfaction.

6. With the above observation, this Writ Petition is disposed

of, at the stage of admission itself. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any,

shall also stand closed.

__________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Date: 16.02.2021

IS

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

WRIT PETITION NO.3394 OF 2021

Date: 16.02.2021

IS