Badireddi Nageswara Rao vs Telu Satyanarayana Murthy
2022 Latest Caselaw 8106 AP

BVLNC,J                                                 CRP 2694 of 2013
Page 1 of 4                                             Dt: 31.10.2022




       HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI


              CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.524 OF 2013


O R D E R:

Heard the learned counsel for Revision Petitioner. No

representation for respondent. This Revision Petition is filed against

the order dated 13-12-2012 of Prl.Junior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry,

delivered in E.P.42/2011 in O.S.736/2001. The Revision Petitioner is

judgment debtor in the execution petition. The respondent/decree

holder filed E.P. U/o.XXI Rule 37 and 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure

to arrest the judgment debtor and to detain him in civil prison, as he

failed to discharge the decree amount, inspite of having means to

discharge the decree amount, and avoiding to discharge the same with

a malafide intention.

2. The decree holder was examined as P.W-1 and the judgment

debtor was examined as D.W-1. The contention of the judgment

debtor is that he is a small farmer, and he has no means to discharge

the decree amount.

 BVLNC,J                                            CRP 2694 of 2013
Page 2 of 4                                        Dt: 31.10.2022

3. The record shows that as per evidence of the Revision

Petitioner/judgment debtor, in the cross-examination, he admitted

that he has been doing dairy farm business, and he failed to produce

accounts showing turnover of his business, and the property described

under Ex.B-1 is worth of Rs.2,00,000/-, even as per the admission of

the judgment debtor in the cross-examination. Therefore, in that view

of the matter, the executing Court held that the contention of the

Revision Petition that he has no means to discharge the decree

amount, cannot be believed.

4. It appears that the Revision Petitioner has sought for installment

decree, which was not accepted by the executing Court, as no such

decree was passed earlier. Admittedly, the Revision

Petitioner/judgment debtor did not ask the original Court to pass

installment decree as laid down U/o.XX Rule 11 of the Code of Civil

Procedure. In that view of the matter, I do not find any grounds to

interfere with the order passed by the executing Court. Therefore, the

Civil Revision Petition is devoid of any merits and liable to be

dismissed.

 BVLNC,J                                          CRP 2694 of 2013
Page 3 of 4                                      Dt: 31.10.2022




5.      In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.    There

shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed.

_____________________________ B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI, J.

31.10.2022

psk
 BVLNC,J                                 CRP 2694 of 2013
Page 4 of 4                             Dt: 31.10.2022

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI

C.R.P.No.524 OF 2013

31st October, 2022

psk