The petitioner is the judgment-debtor in a decree, passed in O.S.No. 869 of 2000 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ongole. The respondent filed that suit for recovery of certain amount. The suit was decreed on 13-09-2001, and the decree became final.

2. Alleging that in spite of several demands, the petitioner did not pay the amount, the respondent filed E.P.No.30 of 2003 in the Court of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram, after obtaining a precept. The respondent alleged that the petitioner has sufficient means, but still refused to honour the decree. Therefore, he invoked Rule 37 of Order 21 C.P.C., and sought for arrest of the petitioner. The Executing Court issued notice, and after hearing both the parties, recorded a finding that the petitioner failed to discharge the obligation under the decree, though he had sufficient means and capacity, and accordingly directed arrest and detention in civil prison, through order dated 14-06-2004. The same is challenged in this C.R.P.

3. Sri C. Ramachandra Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Executing Court was under obligation to record definite findings, as to the possession of the prop