APHC010073572024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3332]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 301/2024 Between:

1. KOPPULA SRIHARI,, S/O VEERA VENKATA SATYANARAYANA, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O D.NO.2-65/1, BOMMIDI VILLAGE, UNGATURU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. YADLA LAKSHMANA RAO, S/o Peesu @ Raja Rao, Hindu, aged about

53 years, R/o D.NOi3-39, Bommidi Village, Ungaturu Mandal, West Godavari District ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to may be pleased For these grounds and other grounds that would be urged at the time of hearing It is prayed that this Honble Court may please ALLOW the Civil Revision Petition by set aside the Docket Order dated 11.01.2024 passed in EP Ho.48/2022 in OS No. 148/2006 on the file of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Tadepafligudem in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to grant STAY of all further proceedings in EP No.48/2022 in OS No.148/2006 on the file of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Tadepalligudem, in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. J.V.PHANIDUTH Counsel for the Respondent:

1. T V JAGGI REDDY The Court made the following order:

Assailing the correctness and the legality of the order dated 11.01.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Tadepalligudem, in Execution Petition No.48 of 2022 in Original Suit No.148 of 2006, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

2. The facts that led to filing of the present Civil Revision Petition is that:

i) The petitioner herein is Judgment Debtor and the respondent herein is decree holder in E.P.No.48 of 2022.

ii) The decree holder, being the plaintiff filed suit in O.S.No.148 of 2006 on the file of the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Tadepalligudem for recovery of money. The said suit was decreed on 15.06.2010. The respondent herein/decree holder filed E.P.No.48 of 2022 under Order XXI Rule37 CPC seeking recovery of the E.P amount from the Judgment Debtor by way of arrest.

iii) To the said petition, the petitioner/Judgment Debtor filed counter stating that he has no means to discharge the E.P amount and that he never refused to discharge the decree amount. It was further contended that the Decree Holder never demanded payment from the Judgment Debtor in view of the pendency of the other civil proceedings. It was further contended that the suit was decreed on 15.06.2010 and the Execution Petitioner was presented on 28.11.2022, hence, the Execution Petition is barred by limitation.

iv) Upon considering the submissions, the Court below issued a warrant of arrest against the Judgment Debtor by way of docket order dated 11.01.2024 on the ground that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Rahul S.Shah, the case does not fall under exceptional circumstances warranting the recording of evidence of the decree holder, and therefore proceeded to issue a warrant of arrest against the Judgment Debtor, directing payment on or before 15.02.2024. Assailing the correctness of the said order, the petitioner herein/Judgment Debtor filed the present Civil Revision Petition. 3. Heard Sri J.V.Phanidutt, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri T.V.Jaggireddy, learned counsel for the respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the counter affidavit filed before the Execution Court, submitted that the petitioner has no means to discharge the EP amount. The suit was decreed on 15.06.2010, whereas the present Execution Petition was filed on