Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Heard Learned Counsel Sri K.Vijay ... vs Unknown on 8 August, 2023
1
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE DR.V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3117 OF 2019
ORDER:
01. Heard learned counsel Sri K.Vijay Kumar for Sri
Venkateswarlu Chakkilam, learned counsel for Revision
Petitioner and Sri V.S.K.Rama Rao, learned counsel for
respondent No.1.
02. Perused the record.
03. The present Revision filed under section 115 of Civil
Procedure Code assails the order dated 24.09.2019 of learned
Principal Junior Civil Judge, Addanki, Prakasam District in
E.P.No.51 of 2019.
04. O.S.No.104 of 2018 is a suit filed by one plaintiff as
against three defendants seeking for declaration of title over the
plaint 'A' schedule property and delivery of the vacant
possession of the same from defendant No.1 and also for
mandatory injunction directing the defendant No.1 to remove
'X-X1' marked compound wall and 'G' marked gate and for
causing such other reliefs.
05. In the said suit the defendants remained exparte and
subsequently the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Addanki
by Judgment and decree dated 19.2.2019 allowed the suit and
passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff as prayed for.
Subsequently, to execute the said decree the decree holder filed
E.P.No.51 of 2019 under order 21 Rule 36 of CPC seeking for
delivery of immovable property that was decreed in favour of
D.Hr. On 24.08.2019 the Executing court issued a warrant
under order 21 rule 36 CPC ordering for delivery of property.
The grievance of J.Drs/defendants in the present Revision is
that before the same Executing Court they have filed
I.A.No.2283 of 2019 under Section 5 of Limitation Act seeking to
condone 123 days delay in presenting an application for setting
aside exparte decree. They also filed I.A.No.2284 of 2019
seeking to set aside the exparte decree. It is submitted that the
Executing court without enquiring into the above applications
proceeded further in execution of the decree, thereby effecting
the rights of the defendants/J.Drs.
06. Having considered the submission of learned counsel on
both sides, it appears to this Court that the original side and
the execution side are with the same Court and in a situation
like this, where there is an exparte judgment and decree, if
there are applications seeking to set aside such decree and
judgment proprietary demands the Executing Court should stay
execution and consider such applications and depending on the
result of those applications, it must proceed with the matters.
Instead of doing that, the Executing Court went ahead with
execution without enquiring into relevant applications pending
on original side.
07. In these circumstances without causing prejudice to the
rights and contentions of both sides, the following order is
required to be made:
01) Learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Addanki,
Prakasam District is directed to take up I.A.No.2284 of
2019 and I.A.No.2285 of 2019 and grant opportunity to
both sides and hear and decide these applications on or
before 4.12.2023. Till these applications are disposed of,
further proceedings in E.P.No.51 of 2019 in O.S.No.104 of
2018 shall stand stayed.
On disposal of those applications depending upon
the result of those applications, the Executing Court has
to proceed further. By these directions, this Revision
petition is disposed of accordingly.
05. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No
order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any, stands
closed.
___________________________________
JUSTICE DR.V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
Date :08.08.2023
GRL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE DR.V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
CRP.No.3117 of 2019
Date: 08.08.2023
GRL.
