HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2266 OF 2025

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed aggrieved by the order dated 23.01.2025, passed by the Execution Court in E.A.No.46 of 2024 in E.P.No.118 of 2022 for default.

2. Heard Sri R.R.Kalyan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pulla Rao Yellanki, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri Gajanand Chakravarthi, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner filed claim petition namely E.A.No.46 of 2024 invoking the provisions of Order 21 Rule 58(1) (2) and (3) (A) read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure Code claiming rights over the E.P. Schedule property, pursuant to the registered sale deed vide Document No.3241 of 2011 dated 26.12.2011 which is said to have been executed by the Judgment Debtor, especially she purchased the property prior to the attachment order granted in favour of the respondent No.1 Decree holder. The Execution Court without giving opportunity much less reasonable opportunity dismissed the claim petition on 23.01.2025, on the sole ground of non- appearance of the petitioner. Unless the Execution Court decides the claim petition on merits, the petitioner will be put to great hardship.

4. Learned counsel for respondent No.1-decree holder vehemently contended that petitioner is having remedy of filing necessary application before the same Execution Court, but the petitioner without availing the said remedy, straight away approached this Court and filed the present Civil Revision Petition and the same is not maintainable under law. 5. Having considered the rival submissions made by respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that petitioner filed claim petition invoking Order 21 Rule 58 (1) (2) and (3) (A) read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure Code, claiming rights in respect of E.P. Schedule property in E.P.No.118 of 2022 basing on the registered sale deed document No.3241 of 2011 dated 26.12.2011 which is said to have been executed by the respondent No.2-Judgment Debtor. The record further reveals that execution Court dismissed the claim petition on 23.01.2025 on the sole ground of non-appearance of the petitioner. This Court is of the considered view that to render substantial justice to the parties, if one opportunity is given to the petitioner to put forth his grievance for adjudication of the claim petition on merits before the Court below, no prejudice is going to be caused to respondent - decree holder. In so far as objection raised by learned counsel for respondent No.1 - Decree holder is concerned, it is straight law to render substantial justice to the parties, technicalities and procedural lapses will not come in the way.

6. For the foregoing reasons, the ex-parte impugned order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Bhadradri Kothagudem, in E.A.No.46 of 2024 in E.P.No.118 of 2022 on 23.01.2024 is set aside and the learned Principal District Judge, Bhadradri Kothagudem is directed to dispose of the claim petition i.e., E.A.No.46 of 2024 in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order, after giving opportunity to both the parties. It is made clear that both the parties are directed to cooperate with the Execution Court for disposal of the application without seeking undue adjournments.

7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Civil Revision Petition shall stand closed.

______________________

J. SREENIVAS RAO, J Date: 19.09.2025 Note: Furnish C.C., within ten (10) days.

BO. PSW