9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 1203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the date of attachment. In the present case, also no neglect can be attributed to the decree holder in release of the attached monies. The judgment debtor inspite of notice of the execution, kept on seeking adjournments and ultimately on 31st March, 2006, the court issued warrants of attachment of the monies lying in the bank account of the judgment debtor. Even thereafter opportunities were sought for making the payment directly. Ultimately on 2nd August, 2006 on the failure of the judgment debtor to make payment inspite of assurances, this court directed the attached monies to be forwarded by the bank in the name of the Registrar General of this Court. Thereafter on 18th December, 2006, the counsel for the judgment debtor for the first t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Petitioner : Mr. Sandeep Sharma with Mr. Vikas Sharma, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. D.S. Mehandru with Ms. Alpana Pandey, Advocates ORDER RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. 1. The only controversy remaining in this execution is two-fold; firstly, as to till which date the decree holder is entitled to interest, whether till the date of attachment effected pursuant to the order in the execution or till the date of release of the attached monies and secondly as to whether the judgment debtor / DDA is entitled to deduct at source amounts under Section 194 A of the Income Tax Act. 2. As far as the first of the aforesaid controversies is concerned, I have recently in N.K. Garg & Company Vs. Union of India MANU/DE/1687/ 2009 held that where the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6) DLT 401 where the question of deduction under Section 194 C of the Income Tax Act was considered. This Court held that the same did not apply to payments pursuant to an award made rule of the Court. It was further held that the payment even though of the nature referred to in Section 194 C of the Income Tax Act had merged in the decree and no deduction at source could be claimed. The said judgment was followed by other Single Judges in order dated 19th February, 2008 in Execution Petition No.129/2007 titled V.K. Dewan & Company Vs. Delhi Jal Board and in order dated 13th July, 2006 in Execution Petition No.55/2006 titled Shri Balwant Jain Vs. DDA. 4. The counsel for the judgment debtor has sought to distinguish the aforesaid judgments b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
