SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(AP) 1339

V. R. K. KRUPA SAGAR
Chittam Narayana Rao – Appellant
Versus
Achanta Varalakshmi – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The judgment debtor before the court executing the decree filed this civil revision petition under article 227 of the constitution of India impugning the order dtd. 13/8/2019 in E.A.No.223 of 2019 in E.P.No.114 of 2014 in O.S.No.494 of 2012 of learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada.

2. Respondent herein is the auction purchaser - cum - decree holder before the court executing the decree.

3. Sri P. Rajasekhar, learned counsel for revision petitioner and Sri A.K. Kishore Reddy, learned counsel for respondent submitted arguments in support of their respective contentions.

4. The following facts are required to be noticed: O.S.No.494 of 2012 before the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada was a suit for recovery of money. After due contest, the suit was decreed on 22/1/2014 in favour of the plaintiff/creditor. Since the decree directions for payment of money were not complied with by the defendant, the decree holder sought for execution of the decree passed in his favour and filed E.P.No.114 of 2014 before the court which passed the decree. That execution was levied under Order XXI Rules 66 and 64 of the CPC requesting the executing court to sell the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top