ORDER

:

Heard Mr.Pally Vinod Kumar Reddy, learned counsel

representing Mr.V.Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner

and perused the record.

2. The present Civil Revision Petition which has been filed assailing the order passed by learned II Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in E.P.No.128 of 2024 in Arb.O.P.No.558 of 2013, whereby, vide the impugned order dated 18.08.2025, the learned Executing Court has issued attachment orders under Order XXI Rule 43 of C.P.C. against the E.P. schedule movable property

belonging to the petitioner herein.

3. The solitary contention of the petitioner is that though he was one of the guarantors, leaving aside the other guarantors, as also Judgment-debtor, the Decree-holder had proceeded against him alone and therefore, the Execution Proceedings have to be

stayed.

4. A perusal of the record would go to show that the Execution Proceedings have been initiated arising out of Arb.OP.No.558 of

2013, where an award was passed on 31.12.2019. It has been informed that against the said award, an appeal has been preferred. However, perusal of the record would go to show that infact, an appeal under Section 70 of the Chit Funds Act, 1982 has been preferred only recently on 05.08.2025. No plausible explanation has been provided as to why the appeal was not preferred promptly within reasonable period of time, though the award was passed six years back. Thus, the award was executable and there cannot be any fault found with the order passed by the Executing Court. The appropriate recourse would be for the petitioner to pursue the appeal and get an interim order there.

5. The Civil Revision Petition fails and is, accordingly, rejected. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________

P.SAM KOSHY, J Nvl Rsp/nvl