A. Ramalingeswara Rao, J.

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 10.07.2013 in E.P.No.75 of 2013 in O.S.No.477 of 2004 passed by the learned Junior Civil Judge, Nalgonda District (for short, trial Court).

2. The judgment debtor in the suit for permanent injunction is the petitioner and thedecree holder is the respondent herein. The suit, O.S.No.477 of 2004 filed by the respondent, was dismissed on 16.03.2009 and the respondent preferred an appeal in A.S.No.48 of 2010 and the same was allowed by the learned I Additional District Judge at Nalgonda (for short, appellate Court) on 01.03.2012. The respondent filed E.P.No.75 of 2013 before the trial Court seeking arrest of the petitioner herein under Order XXI Rule 37 of the Civil Procedure Code (for short, Code) with the following averments.

" The decree holder filed suit for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property against the judgment debtor herein vide O.S.No.477/2004 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Nalgonda. It was dismissed on 16-03-2009. Against the said decree and judgment, the decree holder filed appeal before the Hon'ble 1st Addl. District Judge, Nalgonda vide A.S.No.48/2010. It was allowed and granted perpetual injunction against the judgment debtor herein in respect of the suit schedule property, restraining the J.Dr herein and his agents, servants and associates etc., as not to interfere with the possession of the decree holder in any manner. Even the passing of this decree and judgment against the J.Dr herein, the J.Dr continuing his illegal interference and trying to dispossess the decree holder from his house premises. The decree holder constructed a house in the suit plot during the pendency of the suit. The decree holder resisted the illegal interference of the J.Dr with the help of elders. The J.Dr is mustering his strength with the help of gunda elements and threatening and making several efforts for dispossession since 10th March, 2013."

3. The petitioner herein remained ex parte. After examining the respondent herein as P.W.1, the following docket order was passed by the trial Court on 10.07.2013.

" Heard the counsel for the petitioner, respondent received notices but did not contest the petition. He was set ex parte, the petitioner examined as PW-1 perused the averments and the evidence of the PW-1 they revealed that the petitioner is the decree holder of this E.P., and filed this suit for perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property against the J.Drs., herein in vide O.S.No.477 of 2004, the said suit was dismissed on 16-03-2009 and the appeal by the petitioners herein it was allowed by the first Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nalgonda, in A.S.No.48 of 2010 granting perpetual injunction against the J.Drs., as on the basing of the decree against the J.Drs., they are continuing the illegal interference and trying to dispossess the petitioner for the schedule premises. As per the evidence of the PW-1 he resisted the illegal interference with the J.Dr., with the help of the elders. The J.Dr., is mustering strength with the help of goonda elements and threatening and making several efforts to dispossession since 10th March, 2013.

Therefore, in the above said circumstances, though the petitioner obtained decree against the respondents not to interfere them in the possession of the schedule property, but the respondent J.Drs., are continuing their illegal interference and trying to dispossess the petitioner, it is just and necessary to send the J.Dr., to prison for six months for violating the decree granted by the Hon'ble 1st Addl. Dist. Judge, Nalgonda in A.S.No.48 of 2010."

Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no execution petition seeking arrest of the judgment debtor is maintainable under Order XXI Rule 37 of the Code. He relied on two decisions of this Court in Sadhana Educational Societ