The court upheld the conditional order for part satisfaction of the decree under Order 21 Rule 106 of CPC, considering the long duration since the suit was filed and the lack of payment towards the decree amount.

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent and considered their respective submissions.

2. This Revision has been directed against the order passed in E.A.No.4729 of 2007 in E.P.No.2624 of 2006 in O.S.No.9142 of 1995 on the file of the X Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. The said E.A.No.4629 of 2007 was filed under Order 21 Rule 106 of CPC to set aside the exparte order dated 27.07.2007 in EP.No.2624 of 2006. In EP.No.2624 of 2006 an order of attachment was passed exparte. While disposing of EA.No.4729 of 2007, the Executing Court has directed the defendant / Judgment debtor / revision petitioner to pay Rs.50,000/-to the decree holder towards part satisfaction of the decree fixing a date and it was a conditional order as to the effect that failing which the application shall stand dismissed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent herein / plaintiff would contend that the EP amount itself comes to more than Rs.3 lakhs and that the suit was filed by the respondent herein / plaintiff in the year 1995 and the suit was decreed in the year 1999 and the respondent had filed the EP in the year 2006 and so far no amount was paid towards the decree amount. Under such circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the X Assistant Judge, City Civil Court Chennai (Executing Court) in E.A.No.4729 of 2007 in E.P.No.2624 of 2006 in O.S.No.9142 of 1995.

4. In fine, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. For compliance of the order in E.A.No.4729 of 2007, the revision petitioner is given time till 10.06.2009, failing which the impugned order will take effect. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed.