Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Muktevi Srinivasa Rao vs Alapati V.R. Satya Prasad on 17 December, 2021
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1003 of 2021
ORDER:
The respondent had filed O.S.No.1152 of 2019 in the Court
of the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada for
recovery of rent and eviction of the petitioner from the suit
schedule premises. In the course of the trial, the respondent
had filed an application under Order 15(a) of CPC for deposit of
arrears of rent. As the petitioner did not deposit the rent even
after the order was passed by the trial Court, the defence of the
petitioner was struck of and the suit was allowed by way of
decree and judgment, dated 22.04.2021. After the decree had
been passed, the respondent had filed E.P.No.138 of 2021 for
eviction of the petitioner and for recovery of arrears of rent as
per the decree and judgment, dated 22.04.2021. In the course
of the said execution petition proceedings, the petitioner appears
to have filed a memo, dated 16.08.2021, seeking time to vacate
the premises by the 1st week of September, 2021 and seeking
further time for clearing the arrears of rent. This memo was
recorded by the executing Court. Thereafter, the executing Court
by an order, dated 06.09.2021, had directed delivery of the suit
schedule property to the respondent.
2. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had moved the appellate
Court by way of A.S.No.51 of 2021 and had filed I.A.No.404 of
2021 for stay of further proceedings pursuant to the decree and
judgment, dated 22.04.2021. The petitioner has now filed the
present CRP contending that the execution petition is being
pressed while his application for stay of further proceedings in
I.A.No.404 of 2021 was not being heard.
3. This Court had earlier granted stay of further proceedings
in the E.P., the respondent has now filed I.A.No.2 of 2021 to
vacate such order passed by this Court on 21.10.2021.
4. Heard Sri Sai Gangadhar Chamarthy, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Sri P.Anand Seshu, learned counsel for the
respondent.
5. The main contention of the petitioner is that his right of
appeal is seriously affected by the non-consideration of his
application in I.A.No.404 of 2021 and that completion of the
execution proceedings would effectively remove his right of
appeal.
6. Sri P.Anand Seshu, learned counsel for the respondent,
submits that the petitioner, having filed a memo seeking time to
vacate premises on the 1st week of September, had summarily
accepted the decree and judgment passed on 22.04.2021.
Thereafter, he moved the appellate Court and had filed an
application for stay of further proceedings solely to drag on the
execution proceedings. He would also point to the fact that the
petitioner, while seeking the protection of the Court, did not
comply with the directions of the Court to deposit arrears of
rent. There is much to be said about the conduct of the
petitioner in the present proceedings. However, this Court would
also have to be balance this conduct with the right of the
petitioner to be heard in the appeal.
7. In that view of the matter, the appeal Court shall consider
and pass orders in I.A.No.404 of 2021 on the next date of
hearing, which is posted to 27.12.2021. The petitioner shall
ensure that his case is heard on that day and any absence of the
petitioner on that day will not entitle the petitioner to any further
stay in E.P.No.138 of 2021 in O.S.No.1152 of 2019.
8. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with
a direction to the learned II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada
to hear and pass orders in I.A.No.404 of 2021 on 27.12.2021.
The stay granted by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2021 on
09.09.2021 shall continue only upto 27.12.2021. There shall be
no order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,
shall stand closed.
_________________________
JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
Date : 17.12.2021
SPP
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1003 of 2021
Date : 17.12.2021
SPP
