Rasamsetti Tatayya vs Tatam Surya Rao
2022 Latest Caselaw 8603 AP

                HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI
                        MAIN CASE : CRP No.2244 of 2022
                              PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.      Date                                     ORDER                                   OFFICE
No.                                                                                        NOTE

1.    09.11.2022
                   SRS,J
                             The present revision is filed by judgment debtor
                   against      the    order,    dated    01.10.2022      passed     in
                   E.P.No.129 of 2019 in O.S.No.282 of 2015 on the file of
                   learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I
                   Additional         Judicial   Magistrate      of     First    Class,
                   Kakinada.

                             The respondent/decree holder filed suit in

O.S.No.282 of 2015 against the judgment debtor seeking perpetual injunction and the said suit was decreed by judgment and decree, dated 16.08.2018. the operative portion of the decree reads thus:

"2. That the defendants and their henchmen be and are hereby restrained by way of permanent injunction in favour of the plaintiff from ever interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over item No.2 of the plaint schedule property;"

Subsequently, decree holder filed E.P.No.129 of 2019 under Order XXI Rule 32 of CPC contending that the judgment debtor disobeyed the order of injunction.

After conducting enquiry, by order, dated 01.10.2022, the executing Court found that judgment debtor violated the order of injunction and hence, committed him to civil prison for a period of one month. Against the said order, the present revision is filed.

Heard Sri A.K. Kishore Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner/judgment debtor.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that judgment debtor is not in possession of item No.2 of the schedule property in O.S.No.282 of 2015. He placed reliance on the deposition of the judgment debtor, which is extracted hereunder:

"It is not true to suggest that I tried to erect hut in the EP schedule property DHR restraining the same. Witness adds I was in possession of EP schedule property.'

He would submit that in fact judgment debtor was not in possession of the EP schedule property and without considering the same, the order impugned was passed.

In view of the same, there shall be stay of all further proceedings in E.P.No.129 of 2019 in O.S.No.282 of 2015 on the file of learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada, for a period of eight (8) weeks.

It is made clear that in case the Court comes to the conclusion that petitioner/judgment debtor violated the order of injunction, exemplary costs will be imposed against the petitioner/judgment debtor apart from confirming order of the executing Court.

Issue notice to the respondent.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice on the respondent through RPAD and file proof of service.

It is made clear that if learned counsel for the petitioner fails to file postal receipt within four weeks, the interim order stands vacated without any further reference.

Post on 07.12.2022.

_________ SRS,J ikn