THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3308 of 2025

ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed assailing the order dated 12.06.2025 passed in un-numbered execution petition filed in O.S.No.15 of 2018 on the file of the Principal District Judge at Karimnagar.

2. I have heard Mr.B.Sai Krishna, learned counsel representing Mr.K.Venumadhav, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, and have carefully perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the revision petitioner is decree holder in O.S.No.15 of 2018 which was for recovery of amount. Similarly, the petitioner also filed another suit against the self same respondent/judgment debtor for recoveries of money vide O.S.No.51 of 2018, wherein, the decree was passed and the schedule property which was shown in the unnumbered execution petition was attached. However, the petitioner No.2 which is passing that decree in O.S.No.15 of 2018 was filed seeking attachment of the same property in the Court below by observing that the property was already attached in the O.S.No.15 of 2018 and the petitioner No.2 for the same relief, is not maintainable refused to take the matter. Aggrieved thereby, present petition is filed and prayed for indulgence.

4. In spite of due notice, the respondent/judgment debtor choose to remain silent.

5. I have perused the materials on record.

6. The grievance of the petitioner is that the execution petition is not taken on file. The factual position which is clarifying that, the Court below having regard to the aspect of filing another execution petition against the same decree and judgment therein held that the execution petition is not maintainable. However, the factual position is that as explained by the revision petitioner is that another suit vide O.S.No.51 of 2018 has been filed and against that decree execution petition vide E.P.No.25 of 2025 was filed and the Execution Petition Schedule Property which is self same to that of the schedule property in unnumbered execution petition has been attached. However, law does not prescribed any bar proceedings against the self same property of the judgment debtor for execution of distinct decrees. However, that ground has not been considered by the executing decree, but for another execution petition in the same decree is pending. In this view, it is evident that the Court below has failed to properly appreciate the factual position, even otherwise Court should have taken the execution petition on to file and give opportunity to the petitioner to explain. In this view, curtailing the opportunity to the petitioner herein at the pressure is found improper.

7. Accordingly, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the Court below is directed to receive the unnumbered execution petition filed by the revision petitioner on to file after affording opportunity and consider the settled legal position determining the execution proceedings as per law. With this direction, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

__________________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 11-11-2025 mmr THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3308 of 2025 Dated: 11-11-2025 mmr