Pannala Bixam Reddy vs Bobba Venkat Reddy Since Died His ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 3401 Tel

     THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

           CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1169 of 2022

ORDER:

This Revision is filed assailing the order passed by the Court

below in E.A.No.10 of 2019 in E.P.no.68 of 2019 in O.S.No.84 of

2003.

2. Sri Vijay Kumar Panuganti, learned counsel for the petitioners,

submits that the petitioners are the Judgment-debtors and the

respondents-Decree-holders have filed an application under Section

151 C.P.C. seeking to grant police aid and to implement the order. He

submits that by the impugned order, the Court below has allowed the

petition and directed to provide necessary police protection to the

Decree-holders over the E.P. schedule property and see that the decree

of perpetual injunction is implemented. He submits that requisites for

grant of police aid have not been made out and the executing Court has

erroneously passed the impugned order. While granting police aid, no

independent witnesses have been examined on behalf of the decree-

holders. The decree-holders have suppressed the fact that they

appeared in the appeal and the said appeal was dismissed for default

and subsequently they have filed an application seeking to set aside the

dismissal order on 24.08.2016. The said facts were suppressed by the

decree-holders and no notice was served in the E.P. He submits that

with all misrepresentations, the decree-holders have obtained order.

Hence, the order under revision is liable to be set-aside.

3. This Court perused the impugned order passed by the Court

below. In the impugned order, the Court below has specifically

observed that notice was served to the judgment-debtors in E.P. and

after receiving the notice, they neither appeared through their counsel

nor they choose to file any counter. Accordingly, the petitioners-

judgment-debtors were set ex parte. The suit is of the year 2003. The

petitioners also filed an appeal and as per their case, the appeal was

dismissed for default. In spite of giving an opportunity, the petitioners

have failed to appear before the Court below and after appearing

before the Court, they have failed to file counter. The present petition

filed by the petitioners is nothing but pure abuse of process of law and

only with an intention to drag on the proceedings. This Court finds no

reason to interfere with the order passed by the Court below.

4. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No order

as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J July 5, 2022

mar