A decree holder's delivery warrant was obstructed by the judgment debtor, who sought removal of lock and police aid under Section 151 CPC. The High Court held that an unstayed valid ex parte decree remains executable and dismissed the civil revision petition challenging the execution court's order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
■ S
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1248 OF 2023
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to allow the CRP by setting aside the Docketorderdated 20.04.2023 passed by V Addl.Civil Judge (Junior Division), Vijayawada in E.A.No.6 of 2023 in E.P. No.6 of 2023 in O.S.No.1453 of 2021.
Between:
Mandalapu Vijaya Lakshmi, W/o Gangadhara Prasad, Hindu, Aged about 60 years. Housewife, R/o D.No. 11-52, Flat No.101, SaiChaitra Residency, Road No.2, K.V.R. Colony, Enikepadu, Vijayawada, NTRDistrict.
...PETITIONER
AND
Kodali Nischal Deep, S/o Surya PrakasaRao, Hindu, age about 35 years, R/o D.No. 8-2-678/4, Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Khairathabad, Hyderabad, Telangana State.
...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the PetitioneriSRI SANDHYA DEEPTHI MADDALA Counsel for the Respondent: SRI MADHAVA RAO NALLURI
The Court made the following: ORDER
/
APHC010224012023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ' AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3311]
TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1248/2023
Between:
Mandalapu Vijaya Lakshmi
...PETITIONER
AND
Kodali Nischal Deep
...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.SANDHYA DEEPTHI MADDALA
Counsel for the Respondent:
1.MADHAVA RAO NALLURI
The Court made the following:
/
2
BSBJ C.R.P.No.1248 of 2023
K
ORDER:
This revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution df India is filed aggrieved by the order, dated 20.04.2023, allowing E.A.No.6 of 2023 in E.P.No.6 of 2023 in O.S.No.1453 of 2021 on the file of the Court of V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada,filedunderSection 151 CPC to remove lock and break open the door of the decree schedule property.
- Heard Ms. Sandhya Deepthi, learned counsel for the petitioner/judgment debtor and Sri N. Madhava Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/plaintiff.
- The plaintiff brought the suit against the defendantforadirection to the defendant to vacate the plaint schedule propertyand deliver vacant possession of the plaint schedule property to the plaintiff and to pay arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.9,000/- per month to the plaintiff from 01.04.2020 to 31.03.2021 to a tune of Rs.1,08,000/-and also future damages of Rs.18,000/per month. The suit was decreed ex parte on 04.05.2022. The decree holder filed execution petition for delivery of the schedule property and the execution Court issued delivery warrant. On 28.02.2023, when the DHr along with the Amin went to the schedule property, the JDr did not allow the Amin to enter
I
p
3
0^
BSBJ C.R.P.No.1248 of 2023
into the schedule property and therefore, the warrant could not be executed.
“ Originally, the suit was decreed on 04.05.2022 in favour of the DHr/petitioner directing the JDr to vacatetheEP schedule property within two months. Though sufficient time is granted, the JDr has not vacated the property. According to the petitioner, JDr did not choose to pay regular rent. So, in the circumstances delivery warrant issued, but theaminfailed to execute the warrant due to obstruction caused by theJDr. At this stage, the objections raised by the JDr are not tenable and the amin is permitted to break open thelocksof schedule property for execution of delivery warrant. Process and report call on 25.04.2023.
/
BSB, J C.R.P.No.1248 of 2023
J
4
thereafter, steps have been taken to get the ex parte decree set aside, however, meanwhile, the DHr is illegally proceedingwiththeexecution of the decree by dispossessing the revision petitioner, an old lady, from the schedule property.
/
- On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the revision petitioner/defendant remained ex parte without filing written statement even after engagingacounselandno reason is stated as to why the written statement wasnotfiledandnow only for the purpose of protracting the execution of the decree, though passed ex parte and the same is legally enforceable, the revision petitioner is unnecessarily opposing the relief. Hefurtherstatedthatthe revision petitioner is falsely stating that the Amin and the respondent did not go to the schedule property on 28.02.2023, however,therecord shows that the revision petitioner illegally obstructedtheexecutionof the warrant, and therefore, the execution Court has rightly passed the order providing police aid for due execution of the warrant for delivery of the property.
- So long as the decree which is valid is in force, thesame is executable. Though the revision petitioner contended that the petition was filed to set aside the ex parte decree, no particulars are provided. When there is no order of stay of the decree, the executionCourt is
5
BSB, J G.R.P.No.1248 of 2023
right in proceeding with the execution. No ground taken in the counter IS sufficient ot deny the relief sought. When there is obstruction for execution of the decree, the execution Court is competent to provide police aid for smooth conduct of the execution proceedings. As such, this Court does hot see ahy reason to interfere with the impugned order. 9. In the result, the revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
SDI- G. HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ^ //TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
nm
f
high court
/
DATED; 15/10/2024
ORDER
CRP.No.1248 of 2023
"a
J 2 0 NOV ^
% Gurfenli»i*ci^^" ★ ^
OEsPATC
dismissing the civil revision petition
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the execution court could order breaking open locks and provide police aid to execute a delivery warrant despite the judgment debtor's pending application to set aside the ex parte decree.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mandalapu Vijaya Lakshmi
Kodali Nischal Deep
B S Bhanumathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
