Decree holder challenged closure of an execution petition and dismissal of an application to reopen it, on the ground that the property to be attached was outside territorial jurisdiction. The High Court found no ground to interfere and dismissed the revision.
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.
[3443 I
IN THE HIGHCOURT FOR THESTATE OF TELANGANA
FRIDAY,THE TENTHDAY OF OCTOBER ' TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
petition under Artich 227 of the Constitution of lndia,praying thatin the circumstances statedin the groundsfiled herein,the High Court-T?Y b9 please! to allowthe Revision,by setling aside the orders dated 31.10.2018 in EA No-38 ;f ,Oia in ep No.So? 2O1OpaJseoby Honble I Additional District Judge, Ranga neooy at LB Nagar,and directthe lower court to re-opente !f^31dhear the seekiig iransferof decreefor execution in EP No.s of 2011 and grant "pplid"tion
Between:
...PETITIONER(S)
ntD
...RESPONDENTS
lA NO: { OF 2019
petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavit ttJln support of the p"iition, Itt" Hign Court may be pleased t'o the delay of 217days in resubmittingthe cRPand pass "*oon"
Gounsel for the Petitioner(s):SRl.RAJA SHEKAR RAO SALVAJI
Counsel for the Respondents:Dr- P.B. VIJAYA KUMAR
The Court made thefollowing:ORDER
(-)
THE NOII'BLE SRI.'T'STICE NARSIIIG RAO NANDIKONDA CIVIL RBYISIO.II PEIITIOIT No.2L76 of 2Ol9
ORDERl
This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order passed by the l:arned l-Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, in E.A.I,Io.38 of 2018 in E.P.No.OS of 2O1t in O.S.No. 163 of 2000, wherein the learned Judge has closed the said EA as not maintair:able, in a cryptic manner.
2
()
Rs.2 L,4281- towards the costs of suit to the petitione r/decree holder. Thereafter, ttre execution petition w€s filed for ,. ,"irr :. attachment of said property
\ \
3
o
dismiss,ed. There shall be no order as to costs.
M:iscellaneous petitions, if arry are pending, shallstand
closed.
SD'. C.DEEPIKA ANT REGISTRAR
/
/,TRUE COPYT
OFFICER
To,
PK/PSL
I
HIGH COURT
)
DATED:1011012025
qR IHE S
!l
1 i r.,,iQ )117f,
c)?
* t
DISMISSED
GRP.No.2176 of 2019
k
},
n
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in closing the execution petition and dismissing the application to reopen it where the property sought to be attached was outside the court's territorial jurisdiction?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Megacity Avopa Housing Welfare Society, represented by its authorized representative K.N. Krishna
M/s. Mamatha Projects Private Limited
K.Siddaiah
Narsing Rao Nandikonda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
