Dismissed

Chintapalli Samson v. Karedla Siddeswara Rao

Telangana HC30 Oct 2012CRP/3200/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge dismissed a civil revision petition challenging an execution order directed by the executing court. The court held the order valid as no stay operated from the appellate court despite the appeal's disposal. However, an order maintaining the status quo for two additional weeks was issued.

What did the court decide?

Status quo maintained for two weeks; pending to approach appellate court. Civil Revision Petition dismissed.

Chintapalli Samson Vs Karedla Siddeswara Rao — Execution and Attachment | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶2

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3200 OF 2012

¶3

Dt:- 30.10.2012

¶4

Between:-

¶5

Chintapalli Samson

¶6

… Petitioner and

¶7

Karedla Siddeswara Rao and others

¶8

… Respondents

¶9

This Court made the following:-

¶10

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶11

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3200 OF 2012

¶12

ORDER: -

¶13

The judgment debtor, who suffered decree in O.S.No.98 of 2004 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Chirala, is the petitioner herein. The order impugned is the one passed by the executing court in E.P.No.13 of 2011, dated 28.06.2012, directing execution of the decree, as there is admittedly no stay in operation from the appellate court.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that though an appeal is filed against the said decree and is pending before II Additional District Judge, Ongole, admittedly there is no stay in operation pending the said appeal. It also appears that the said appeal was dismissed for nonprosecution and the petitioner’s application for restoration of the appeal is pending. Thus, whatever be the situation, admittedly there is no stay by the appellate court and as such the order impugned passed by the executing court directing execution of the decree cannot be faulted on any ground. Revision, therefore, is merit less and is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶15

However, as there was an interim stay operating in this revision since 16.07.2012, status quo existing as on today shall continue for two more weeks from today within which petitioner is at liberty to approach the appellate court for appropriate relief with regard to stay of execution of the decree and if the same is permissible the appellate court shall consider.

¶16

Subject to the above, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. The miscellaneous applications, if any, stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶17

____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J

¶18

30.10.2012 Note: Issue C.C. by 31.10.2012. {B/o} lmv

¶19

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶20

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3200 OF 2012

¶21

30.10.2012

¶22

lmv

Chintapalli Samson v. Karedla Siddeswara Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chintapalli Samson v. Karedla Siddeswara Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Emmaneni Satish Vs M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited

Akramsetti venkateswaramma Vs Mekala Sambasiva Rao

Vadhiboyana Venkata Krishna Reddy Vs Smt. v. Supraja Chandra

Chintal Ram Reddy Vs Vadal Kistaiah

Sri P.Randheer Arya, Vs Smt. Challa Rama Devi

L.Umapathi, Vs Lingala Prabhilingam