GARNISHEE ORDER: ORDER XXI RULES 46 of CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Gopika Kalidas, a distinguished graduate from Alliance Law School, Alliance University, Bangalore. Read More

---

Introduction

The execution of decrees stands as the bedrock in judicial efficacy. Without robust mechanisms to enforce court-mandated obligations, the pronouncements of justice would ring hollow. Within the procedural tapestry of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). The CPC lays down a detailed mechanism for the execution of decrees under Order 21. One of the essential provisions in this context is Rule 46A, which forms a part of garnishee proceedings. It is a critical space governing the issuance of notices to garnishees, those third parties holding assets belonging to judgement-debtors. This article delves into the intricacies of this rule, exploring the purpose, scope and practical implications.

The Genesis of Garnishee Proceedings

Before dissecting Rule 46A, it is imperative to understand the rationale behind garnishee proceedings. In the landscape of debt recovery, a judgement-debtor may posses’ assets not directly within their physical control but held by the third party. These assets, be it bank balances, salaries, or other receivables, represent a potential avenue for satisfying the decree-holder’s claim. Garnishee proceedings, therefore, provide a legal framework to tap into these resources, ensuring that the judgement-debtor cannot evade their obligations by concealing assets in the hands of others.

Illustration:

Suppose A (the decree-holder) obtains a court decree against B (the judgment-debtor) for ₹5 lakhs. However, B does not have sufficient assets directly accessible to A. Upon investigation, A learns that B has ₹3 lakhs deposited in a bank account with XYZ Bank and is also owed ₹2 lakhs by C for a past business transaction.

A can initiate garnishee proceedings under Rule 46A of Order XXI of the Civil Procedure Code to recover the amount. The court may issue a notice to XYZ Bank and to C (the garnishees), directing them not to release any funds to B until further orders. If the garnishees confirm the existence of the funds owed to B, the court may direct them to directly pay A, thereby satisfying the decree.

Definition and Objective of Order 21 Rule 46A

Order 21 Rule 46A introduces the concept of garnishee proceedings in execution law. It allows a decree-holder to attach a deb owned to the judgement debtor by a third party (garnishee). This provision ensures that a judgement debtor cannot avoid liability by retaining funds through third-party arrangements. This rule encapsulated of “audi alteram partem”, ensuring that the garnishee is given a fair opportunity to be head before any adverse order is passed. The rule mandates the court, upon application by the decree-holder, shall issue a notice to the garnishee, requiring them to:

1. Pay the debt into court– The garnishee may be directed to deposit the amount owed to the judgement-debtor inro the court, effectively transferring the asset under judicial control.
2. Appear and show cause– Alternatively, the garnishee may be summoned to appear before the court and provide reasons why they should not be compelled to pay the debt.

This notice acts as a crucial safeguard, preventing arbitrary order that could potentially prejudice the garnishee’s rights. it ensures transparency and fairness, allowing the garnishee to present their case and challenge the decree-holder’s assertions.

The primary purpose of Rule 46A is to prevent the judgement debtor from evading the execution process by securing payments through third parties. It provides a means for the decree-holder to recover the amount directly from the garnishee. The objectives are as follows:

1. Ensuring Due Process– As stated above primary objective of Rule 46A is to uphold the principles of natural justice, specifically “audi alteram partem” (the right to be heard). It ensures that the garnishee is given a fair opportunity to respond to the decree-holder’s claim before any court order is issued.
2. Protecting Garnishee’s rights– The safeguards the garnishee from being unfairly compelled to pay a debt without being heard. This prevents arbitrary orders and protects the garnishee’s financial interests.
3. Facilitating Fair Execution of decrees– While protecting the garnishee, it also facilities the fair execution of decrees by providing a structured process for attaching debts held by third parties. It creates a system where the courts can be assured that all parties involved have had their opportunity to be heard.
4. Proving a Pathway for the Garnishee to Respond– This rule provides the garnishee the ability to pay the owed funds into the court, or to give reason why they should not be required to pay the funds.

Scope of Rule 46A

The scope includes:

1. Application to Garnishee Proceedings– The scope of Rule 46A is strictly limited to garnishee proceedings, which deal with situations where a third party (the garnishee) owes a debt to the judgment-debtor. It governs the procedural aspect of providing notice to this third party.
2. Triggered by Decree Holder’s Applications– It comes into play when a decree-holder seeks to execute a decree by attaching a debt owed to the judgment-debtor by a third party.
3. Concerns Notice, Not debt Determination– This rule primarily focuses on the issuance of notice, not on the determination of whether the debt exists. The determination of the debt is a separate proceeding.

This provision applies to:

• Debts owed to the judgement debtor by third parties.
• Bank balances, accounts receivable and dues payable by a garnishee
• Any monetary obligation a third party owes to the judgement debtor

It does not apply to

• Salaries of government employees.
• Future or contingent debt not yet payable.

The Power of Court and Explanation of Order 21 Rule 46A

The court’s discretionary power to issue court notice is enshrined in Rule 46A, and the court may refuse to pass such Order if it is inequitable and the court believes it will cause prejudice to the garnishee, or if the grounds of the application seeking that remedy are insufficient, or if the affidavit filed by the decree holder is frivolous or ambiguous, etc.  However, discretion must be utilized in a judicial manner. Where the court determines that there is a bona fide challenge against the claim that is neither fraudulent or frivolous, it should not take action under this rule.

Under Order 46A of this Code, a garnishee must be served with notice before a garnishee order can be issued against him[1]. The order will be deemed void in the eyes of the law if the garnishee has not been given a fair amount of time and a chance to explain himself before it is issued. Such an order would be deemed null and void and would be in violation of the natural justice principle, according to the code’s provisions. In addition, it is noted that a garnishee order can only be issued against the garnishee if the judgment debtor is able to collect the debt from the garnishee.

Through the 1976 amendment, Order 21 Rule 46 A was added to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and it grants the court the discretion to order the garnishee to refrain from paying a specific sum directly to the judgment debtor in order to safeguard the judgment creditor’s interests. Before the amendment, the garnishee could not be ordered by the court to pay the debt in court. The third party could not be ordered to pay a debt in court and turn it over to the judgment creditor.

Garnishee proceedings are the proceedings in rem as well as in personam. It operates on the personam of the garnishee as on the debt. As a result, it is characterized as a proceeding quasi in rem. Cheques cannot be connected under Order 21 Rule 46. It is categorized as Order 21 Rule 46. It is attached under Order 21 Rule 51, the attachment of negotiable instruments. Similarly, contingent debts cannot be added. The court must exercise this authority with prudence, after ensuring that the case is prima facie and that no innocent person is harassed otherwise, the whole aim of the statute, which is to provide the remedy, will be jeopardised.

Application Process and Supporting Affidavit

The process of attaching a debt under Rule 46A involves the following key steps:

1. Filing of Application– The decree-holder must apply to the executing court for attachment of a debt under Order 21 Rule 46. The application must specify:

• The judgment debtor (the person liable under the decree).
• The garnishee (the third party who owes money to the judgment debtor).
• Details of the debt, such as bank account details, outstanding balances, or contracts.

2. Issuance of notice of Garnishee– Upon satisfaction that the application is valid, the court issues a notice to the garnishee. The garnishee is directed to:

• Deposit the attached amount in court or,
• Appear before the court and show cause why the debt should not be attached.

3. Garnishee’s Response– The garnishee has many responses some are the following options:

• Admit to the debt, then the court may order direct payments to the decree-holder.
• Deny the debt where the garnishee may claim that they do not own any amount.
• The garnishee can raise objections and challenge the attachment on legal grounds.

4. Court Enquiry– if the garnishee denies any liability, then the court will conduct an enquiry where then the evidence is examined to determine whether the garnishee is actually liable to the judgement debtor.
5. Final Order of the Court- the court can direct the following:

• The court gives order payment where the garnishee is directed to pay if the debt is admitted.
• The garnishee is discharged if the court finds no liability.
• If the garnishee refuses to comply despite being held liable, the court may pass an execution order against them.

To summarize the above the initiation of garnishee proceedings under Rule 46A necessitates a formal application by the decree-holder. This application must be accompanied by an affidavit, a sworn statement of facts, affirming the existence of a debt owed by the garnishee to the judgment-debtor. The affidavit must provide sufficient particulars to establish a prima facie case, demonstrating the legal basis for the decree-holder’s claim.

The affidavit serves as a crucial evidentiary tool, providing the court with the necessary information to assess the validity of the decree-holder’s assertions. It must be meticulously drafted, ensuring that all relevant facts are accurately presented. Any material misrepresentation or omission could potentially undermine the decree-holder’s case.

The Content and Service of the Notice

The notice issued Rule 46A must clearly articulate the following:

1. The nature of the debt– The notice should include the amount owing by the garnishee to the judgment-debtor, as well as any pertinent information about the underlying transaction.
2. The court’s directive– The notification must include whether the garnishee is expected to pay the debt into court or appear and show cause.
3. The date and time of appearance– If the garnishee is called to attend, the notification must specify the date, time and location of court hearing.
4. The consequences of non-compliance– The notice should clearly outline the potential repercussions of failing to comply with its directives, including the possibility of a court order compelling payment.

The notice must be served in accordance with the provisions of the CPC, ensuring that the garnishee is duly informed of the proceedings.  Proper service is required to establish jurisdiction and avoid legal objections based on a lack of notice.

The Garnishee’s Response and Potential Defenses

Upon receipt of the notice, the garnishee had the option to either comply with the court’s directive or appear and prevent their case. If the garnishee chooses to contest the decree-holder’s claim, then they may raise several potential defenses as follows:

1. Denial of the debt– The garnishee may dispute the existence or amount of the debt, arguing that no such liability exists.
2. Set-off or counterclaims– The garnishee may exercise a right of set-off or counterclaim against the judgment debtor, decreasing or extinguishing the debt owed.
3. Prior assignment or charge– The garnishee may contend that the debt was previously assigned or charged in favour of a third party, so precluding the decree-holder’s claim.
4. Exemption from attachment– Certain debts or assets may be exempt from attachment under the CPC or other relevant legislation.
5. Jurisdictional challenges– The garnishee may contest the court’s authority to issue the garnishee order, claiming that the court lacks the essential geographical or subject-matter jurisdiction.

The garnishee bears the burden of proof, thus they must produce compelling evidence to support their defenses.  The court will carefully review the garnishee’s claims to ensure that they are not exposed to excessive hardship or unfairness.

The Court’s Discretion, the Principles of Equity and Due Process

The court has broad discretion when deciding garnishee proceedings, guided by the principles of equity and fairness. The court must strike a balance between the decree-holder’s entitlement to enforce the order and the garnishee’s legitimate interests. The court must ensure that the garnishee is not subjected to any unreasonable burden or prejudice. The court may consider various factors, including the nature of the debt, the garnishee’s financial position, and the potential impact of the garnishee order on their business or personal affairs. The court may also impose conditions or restrictions on the garnishee order to mitigate any potential hardship.

The emphasis on due process in Rule 46A highlights the fundamental foundations of natural justice.  The regulation guarantees that the garnishee is not condemned without being heard, so preventing arbitrary orders that may infringe their rights. The requirement of notice and an opportunity to be heard is essential to maintain the integrity of the judicial process.

The Interplay with Order 21 Rule 46

Rule 46A must be read in conjunction with Rule 46 of Order 21, which governs the attachment of debts and shares. Rule 46 provides the legal framework for attaching these assets, while Rule 46A outlines the procedural steps for issuing notice to the garnishee. The two rules work in tandem, ensuring that the attachment process is conducted in a fair and transparent manner.

Rule 46 essentially allows the court to attach the debt, and rule 46A then sets the procedure in motion to notify the garnishee of that attachment and give them their chance to respond before the court orders them to pay the debt to the court, or the decree holder.

Case Laws

In KHE Supply CO Ltd. v. Lakshmi Narayan Sukhani [2], it was seen that garnishee actions cannot be filed for debts that have not been attached under Rule 46 or are ineligible for attachment.  Garnishee procedures cannot be conducted against individual partners for debts owed to a business under an execution decree.  The foundation of garnishee proceedings is an attachment under Rule 46 was outlined in the case of Imperial Bank of India v. Bibi Sayeedun[3]

Additionally in Jung v. Mohd Ali [4] a decree holder can only take action against a garnishee when the judgment debtor possesses an immediate right to claim the debt from the garnishee. If the judgment debtor is entitled to receive money only upon certain conditions, the decree holder will face the same limitation as the judgment debtor and must wait for the occurrence of that condition.  The court in O’Driscoll v. Manchester Insurance Committee [5] stated that the debt that is attachable is one which the judgment debtor can enforce payment of, if he desires to do so gave the distinction between the case where there is existing debt, payment whereof is deferred and the case where the debt and its payment rests in future.

Practical Implications and Challenges of Rule 46A

The practical implications are in the scenarios on how businesses and financial institutions often use Rule 46A to recover outstanding debts from corporate debtors. In the banking and finance sector also regularly garnishee orders directing them to attach funds in a customer’s account. The challenge in implementation also raises when there are delays in court proceedings that will hinder the quick enforcement of garnishee orders. Further, disputes over liability between the garnishee and the judgment debtor may complicate execution.

Despite its well-intentioned objectives, the implementation of Rule 46A can present practical challenges. These challenges include:

1. The difficulty in locating the garnishee, particularly if they are residing outside the court’s jurisdiction.
2. Disputes may also arise regarding determining the exact amount of the debt owed by the garnishee to the judgement-debtor.
3. The court must carefully assess the validity of the garnishee’s defenses, which may require extensive investigation and evidence.
4. Enforcing the garnishee order can be challenging, particularly if the garnishee is uncooperative or refuses to comply.

Conclusion

A garnishee order is an effective legal tool for creditors aiming to enforce a judgment. Garnishee orders allow creditors to retrieve debts from a third party, making them a dependable and efficient method of debt recovery. Nevertheless, the process must be adhered to precisely, with measures established to safeguard the rights of garnishees and other involved parties.

The legal framework, governed by Rule 46A of Order 21 of the CPC is essential for the effective enforcement of monetary judgments. Permitting the attachment of debts due to the judgment debtor stops debtors from evading execution measures. This provision is frequently used in situations involving debt recovery, banking, and commercial conflicts, providing decree holders with a strong means of recourse.

However, delays in execution, legal objections by garnishees, and difficulties in demonstrating culpability frequently hold down the process. Changes intended to speed up garnishee procedures could significantly enhance the efficacy of this provision. In modern commercial litigation, Rule 46A serves as a powerful tool for enforcing monetary judgments. It is essential for attorneys, financial institutions, businesses, and claimants seeking to assert their rights under a judicial directive to comprehend its methodology, scope, and legal implications.

Bibliography

• Execution of Money Decrees- Different Modes of Execution- Provisions of Law & Case Law, https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3ec031a04f965818a8533f5613003c7db/uploads/2024/07/2024070234.pdf.
• Garnishee Orders: Order XXI Rules 46 CPC, https://lawfoyer.in/garnishee-orders-order-xxi-rules-46-cpc/.
• Whether a Garnishee Must Be a Party to the Execution Petition, https://supremetoday.ai/issue/Whether-a-garnishee-must-be-party-to-the-execution-petition.
• Power of Indian Courts to Issue Garnishee Order, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1539347.
• Garnishee Order in CPC (Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908), https://factualcode.com/garnishee-order-in-cpc-code-of-civil-procedure-1908/.
• The Concept of Garnishment, https://jaiib.learningsessions.in/garnishee-order-cpc.
• Garnishee Order & Attachment Order, https://bankingdigests.com/blog/garnishee-order-attachment-order/.
• Garnishee Order: What it is?, https://lawbhoomi.com/garnishee-order/#Order_21_Rule_46A_Notice_to_the_Garnishee.
• Garnishee Order, https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/ttp-code-of-civil-procedure/garnishee-order.
• Code of Civil Procedure, https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/2191.

[1] Surinder Nath v Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 1777.

[2] KHE Supply CO Ltd. v. Lakshmi Narayan Sukhani, AIR 1941 Cal 364.

[3] Imperial Bank of India v. Bibi Sayeedun, AIR 1960 Pat 132.

[4] Jung v. Mohd Ali, AIR 1972 AP 70.

[5] O’Driscoll v. Manchester Insurance Committee, 1915 3 KB 499, CA.