Molli Apparao, v. Kanddepalli Adinarayana
Case brief
What is this about?
In a revision against an execution order directing arrest for non-payment of decretal money, the court dismissed the petition, allowed a deadline extension, and directed deposit of the balance amount to avoid imprisonment.
What did the court decide?
Civil Revision Petition dismissed; petitioner granted time to deposit balance amount by 15.06.2011.
What the court decided
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1486 of 2011
ORDER:
The petitioner herein is judgment debtor No.2. The first respondent-decree holder filed E.P.No.118 of 2007 in O.S.No.542 of 1999 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka for recovery of the decreetal amount due from the petitioner, in default, to sent him to civil prison. The learned Judge, by order dated 22.09.2008, allowed the E.P. directing the petitioner and the second respondent, who are judgment debtor Nos.1 and 2, to pay the decreetal amount of Rs.2,15,074/- by 20.11.2008, failing which, arrest warrant be issued to the petitioner-judgment debtor No.2 and send him to the civil prison for realization of the E.P. amount. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed the present revision.
This Court, by order dated 06.03.1009, while ordering notice before admission granted stay of arrest on condition that the petitioner deposits 1/3rd of the decreetal amount within six weeks from that day.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner has already deposited 1/3rd of the decreetal amount, he may be granted some more time to deposit the balance amount.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed permitting the petitioner to deposit the balance 2/3rd E.P. amount by 15.06.2011 before the Court below. In default, the first respondent-decree holder is at liberty to get the order dated 22.09.2008 in E.P.No.118 of 2007 in O.S.No.542 of 1999 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, executed. No order as to costs.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, having deposited one-third of the decretal amount, is entitled to additional time for payment of the balance.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Judgment Debtor No.2
- respondent
Decree Holder
Coram
V. ESWARAIAH
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRP/1486/2011
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court