Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Principal Junior Civil ... vs Unknown on 9 February, 2022
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1031 of 2020
ORDER:
The respondent had filed O.S.No.135 of 2002 before the
Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate,
Narsapur for recovery of money from the petitioner herein. This
suit was allowed by the trial Court by way of a judgment and
decree, dated 23.04.2007. Thereafter, the respondent filed
E.P.No.148 of 2010 for executing the said judgment and decree.
The Executing Court had ordered the arrest of the petitioner
herein on 05.03.2012 and directed that the petitioner be sent to
civil prison. Thereafter, the petitioner herein had filed E.A.No.61
of 2019 in E.P.No.148 of 2010 to cancel the warrant of arrest.
In the said application, the petitioner also filed E.A.No.9 of 2020
before the Executing Court to receive certain documents set out
in the memo filed along with the application. This application
was dismissed by the Executing Court by an order, dated
15.06.2020. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has
approached this Court by way of the present revision petition.
2. Heard Sri T.Sai Surya, learned counsel for the petitioner,
and Sri N.Siva Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent.
3. Sri T.Sai Surya, learned counsel for the petitioner, would
submit that the documents submitted by the petitioner are the
medical prescription and discharge summary, which would show
that the petitioner was suffering from cardiac problem and
cannot be arrested and sent to civil prison. He submits that the
health of the petitioner would not permit the petitioner to remain
in jail and there is every danger of threat to his life. He submits
that production of the said documents was essential for the case
of the petitioner and the Executing Court ought not to have
rejected the said application.
4. Sri N.Siva Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent,
would submit that these medical documents would not in any
manner make out any case in favour of the petitioner and as
such the order of the Executing Court was proper and does not
require any interference.
5. The documents sought to be produced by the petitioner
are medical prescriptions for the period between 16.08.2013 to
14.03.2017 and discharge summary, dated 17.04.2017, is of the
wife of the petitioner. The application for recall of the warrant
was filed by the petitioner in the year 2019. In the
circumstances, the Executing Court had taken the right view that
these documents are not relevant for the case and as such
dismissed the application. I do not find any reason to defer from
the view taken by the trial Court that these documents are not
relevant for the adjudication of the application filed by the
petitioner for recall of the arrest warrant.
6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There
shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending
shall stand closed.
_________________________
JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
Date : 09.02.2022
SPP
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1031 of 2020
Date : 09.02.2022
SPP
