THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1514 of 2022
ORDER:
Heard the submission of Sri R. Lakshmi Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, as well as Sri P. Durga Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1-DHR.
2. Challenge in this Civil Revision Petition is the order that is rendered by the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, in E.P.No.44 of 2016 in O.S.No.129 of 2001, dated 04.04.2022.
3. Upon hearing learned counsel for the respect parties and also on perusing the material that is produced, what could be perceived by this Court is that an application was filed by respondent No.1/Decree Holder seeking for attachment of movable property, which belongs to the petitioners herein. The petitioners are the Judgment Debtor Nos.1 and 2 in the Execution Petition in question. The petitioners resisted the relief sought for mainly on three grounds; firstly, that the A.P. Chit Fund Act, 1971 has no application to the case on hand; secondly, that 2 Dr. CSL,J C.R.P.No.1514 of 2022 petitioner No.1/Judgment Debtor No.1 did not receive the entire price amount; and thirdly, that petitioner No.1/Judgment Debtor No.1 is not the owner of the house, which is shown in E.P. schedule. Negativing all the three grounds, the Executing Court over-ruled the objections taken. The findings given are assailed in this Civil Revision Petition.
4. During the course of hearing, without going into the merits of the case, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that respondent No.1/Decree Holder, subsequent to passing of impugned order, moved an application under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C. seeking for amendment of the E.P. schedule property and, therefore, execution of the impugned order could not be taken till disposal of the said Execution Application.
5. The plea taken appears to be justifiable. Further-more, this Court does not find any infirmity in the order under challenge. Therefore, this Court considers it desirable to dispose of the Civil Revision Petition by upholding the order under challenge, however, by giving protection considering the apprehension of the petitioners.
3
Dr. CSL,J C.R.P.No.1514 of 2022
6. Resultantly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. The order rendered by the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, in E.P.No.44 of 2016 in O.S.No.129 of 2001, dated 04.04.2022 is upheld, as no grounds are found for interference by this Court. However, the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, is directed not to execute the order of attachment of movable properties till disposal of the Execution Application filed for amendment of the Execution Petition. No order as to costs.
7. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA 22.09.2022.
Msr 4 Dr. CSL,J C.R.P.No.1514 of 2022 THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1514 of 2022 22.09.2022 (Msr) 5 Dr. CSL,J C.R.P.No.1514 of 2022