Dismissed

Perumalla Sekhar v. Kovvuri Ammireddy(Original Dhr)

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Sept 2024CRP/2405/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil Revision Petition challenging an executing court order overruling a judgment debtor's objection regarding property valuation during auction sale. The Court held that without a specific application for valuation, the executing court's order could not be faulted, dismissing the revision.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed; miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

Perumalla Sekhar Vs Kovvuri Ammireddy(Original Dhr) — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT % c/M i\rv HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY ^ CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2405 of 2024

¶5

Petition under Section 115 of CPC, aggrieved by the order in E.P.No.64/2010 in O.S, No.6/2002 dated 01.07.2011 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District

¶6

Between:

¶7

Perumalla Sekhar, S/o. late Seetharamayya, Hindu, aged about 67 years. Business, Vijaya Talkies, Kadiyam, Kadiyam Mandal East Godavari District.

¶8

...Appellant/Petitioner/J.D.R

¶9

AND

¶10

Kovvuri Ammireddy (Original DHR), S/o. Sura Reddy, Anaparthi, East Godavari District.

¶11

Grandhi Lakshman (Transferee DHR), S/o. Ramakrishna, Hindu, aged about 40 years. Business, G-1, Indus Residency Apartments, Gandhipuram - 3, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District.

¶12

...Respondents/ Respondents/DHRs

¶13

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶14

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased grant stay of all further proceedings in EP.No.64/2010 in

¶15

OS.No.6/2010 dated 01.07.2011 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District.

¶16

Couhisel for the Petitioner : Sri Ch Dhanamjaya

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

APHC011492512012

¶20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶21

[2281]

¶22

MONDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶23

PRESENT

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶25

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:41^2012)^^

Between:

Perumalla Sekhar

...PETITIONER

AND

Kovvuri Ammireddy And Another

¶31

...Respondent

¶32

Counsel for the Petitioner;

¶33

1.CH DHANAMJAYA

¶34

Counsel for the Respondent;

¶35

¶36

The Court made the following:

¶37

¶38

¶39

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL REVISION PETITION SR NO: ftga

¶40

ORDER:

¶41

The present Civil Revision Petition is filed questioning^theOrder dated 01.07.2011 in E.P.No.64 of 2010 in O.S.No.6 of 2002 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundray, East^Godavari District, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

¶42

The petitioner is the J.Dr. The Respondent No.1 filed a suit for recovery of money and the said suit was decreed. The^{RespondentNo.1} thereafter executed Assignment Deed dated 04.10.2006 in favour of Respondent No.2. Thereafter, the Respondent No.2 filed^E.P.No.64of 2010 for sale of the scheduled property for realization of the decretal amount. The Petitioner raised certain objections, which^{wereoverruledby} the Executing Court. Questioning the same, the present^{CivilRevision} Petition is filed.

¶43

The primary objection of the petitioner was with regard to the valuation of the property. Though the J.DR saying that^{thevalueofthe} property is more than one crore, the Judgment Debtor^hasshownthe schedule property as Rs.8,00,000/-, but whereas the^{Courthastakenthe}

¶44

¶45

¶46

value as 20 Lakhs. It is his case that the scheduled property cannot be sold in auction for realization of the decree amount of Rs.5,00,000/-.

¶47

The trial Court was of the opinion that the J.Dr did not take steps to measure and divide the schedule property and put to^{saleforauctionfor} realization of the decretal amount. Since the J.DR has not taken any steps, the objections raised by him were overruled by the Executing Court. Hence, the present Civil Revision Petition.

¶48

This Court is of the opinion that the Order of the Executing Court cannot be faulted as the petitioner did not file any separate application showing the valuation of the property and identifying the auctionable portion of the property. In the absence of any such action by the Petitioner/J.DR, this Court does not find any fault^{withtheorderofthe} Executing Court.

¶49

Accordingly, the Civil Revision is dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶50

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶51

SD/- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶52

//TRUE COPY//

¶53

SECTION OFFICER

¶54

To 1. The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry, East^Godavari District.

¶55

One CC to Sri Ch Dhanamjaya, Advocate [OPUC]

¶56

Three CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:23/09/2024

ORDER

CRP.No.2405 of 2024

A?
^ 17 JAN 2025 c*
s. <

¶64

DISMISSING THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

Perumalla Sekhar v. Kovvuri Ammireddy(Original Dhr)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Perumalla Sekhar v. Kovvuri Ammireddy(Original Dhr)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepalli Naga Rani Vs The Tahsildar

Gandreti Bangarraju Vs The Tahsildar

Nidigattu Uma Vs The Tahsildar

Garaga Prabhakar Rao, East Godavari Dist Vs Garaga Venkata Rao, East Godavari Dist

Gandha Prasanna Murthy Vs Andhra Bank, a Government of India and Anothers

Chinamilli Krishna Murhty Vs Grandi China Appa Rao