Dismissed

D N R G Rao, Guntur Dist v. G Rajendra, Guntur Dist

Telangana HC15 Nov 2018CRP/4301/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A civil revision challenging a stay dismissed by the trial court, held to be infructuous following the dismissal of the underlying application to set aside an ex parte decree and condone delay. The revision was disposed of as there was no ground for restoration.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition disposed of with no costs; miscellaneous applications pending, if any, stand closed.

D N R G Rao, Guntur Dist Vs G Rajendra, Guntur Dist — Execution and Attachment | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶3

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4301 of 2016

¶4

ORDER :

¶5

This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the Order dt. 26.08.2016 in E.A.No.125 of 2016 in E.P.No.25 of 2012 in O.S.No.142 of 2007 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Repalle.

¶6

The petitioner/ JDr filed petition under Order XXI Rules 26 and 29 CPC alleging that the respondent filed suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.1,89,816/ - against the petitioner herein and obtained ex parte decree and thereafter, the petitioner filed I.A.No.247 of 2016 to set aside the decree along with petition to condone delay in filing application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. But, in the meanwhile, the respondent herein/ DHR filed E.P.No.125 of 2016 to realise the decretal amount by way of arrest under Order 21 Rules 37 and 38 CPC. As the EP is pending, the petitioner herein filed Petition under Order 22 Rules 26 and 29 CPC, to grant stay of all further proceedings till disposal of I.A.No.247 of 2016 filed before the Senior Civil Judge i.e., original Court and the same was dismissed by the trial Court for default. Aggrieved thereby, the present Civil Revision is filed on various grounds.

¶7

During hearing, learned counsel for the respondent herein/ D.Hr brought to the notice of this Court that the trial Court dismissed I.A.No.247 of 2016 filed by the petitioner herein to stay all further proceedings in E.P.No.24 of 2012 till disposal of I.A.No.247 of 2016 in O.S.No.142 of 2007 and therefore, the question of granting stay during pendency of I.A.No.247 of 2016 does not arise and therefore, the petition become infructuous virtually. Hence, I find no ground to restore the Petition in

¶8

¶9

E.A.No.125 of 2016 in E.P.No.25 of 2012, which was dismissed for default, in view of dismissal of I.A.No.247 of 2016.

¶10

Ac c ordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶11

M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J Dat e: 1 5 -1 1 -2 0 1 8 eh a

¶12

¶13

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶14

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4301 of 2016
Dt. 15-11-2018
eha

D N R G Rao, Guntur Dist v. G Rajendra, Guntur Dist

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D N R G Rao, Guntur Dist v. G Rajendra, Guntur Dist

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

Singampalli Mani, Visakhapatnam Dist and Another Vs Navabhakula Jangalayya, Visakhapatnam Dist and Two Others

B v v Satyanarayana, Visakhapatnam Vs S Nageswara Rao, Visakhapatnam and 9 Others

Dr.M S Kumar, Nellore Dist Vs Dr. Jonna Jyothsna, Anantapuram Dist

Allamsetty Sivarama Prasad Vs Koneru Sridevi

Yalakki Rajasekhar Vs Smt. Yalakk. Chitra

Sri Satyanarayan Modi Vs Sri Ibrahimpatnam Bhaskar Chary