The Special Deputy Collector La ... vs Thokala Ashok
2023 Latest Caselaw 572 Tel

        HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

                    C.R.P.No.304 of 2023

ORDER:

This revision is filed against the order, dated

31.10.2022, passed by the learned I-Additional District

Judge, Nizamabad, in E.P.No.2 of 2015 in LAOP No.698 of

2003.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

respondents herein/Decree Holders filed E.P., against the

petitioner herein/Judgment debtor-Special Deputy

Collector, LA-cum-Loc, Unit SRSP (Land Acquisition

Officer) Pochampad for attachment of the movables of

J.Drs., for realization of the decretal amount. Learned

counsel for the petitioner submits that L.A.O.P.No.698 of

2003 was decreed on 13.08.2012 for acquiring the lands of

the respondents to an extent of Ac.1-05 guntas for

excavation of canal and they were awarded compensation

with interest and solatium and, they are entitled for total

amount of Rs.62,85,100/- and prayed to attach the movables

of J.Dr.

3. Learned Government Pleader made appearance on

behalf of the respondents and stated that entire amount is

already deposited.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner herein stated that

they have filed calculation memo in page Nos.16 and 17 of

the paper book to show that they have deposited entire

amount of Rs.51,13,353/- and they need not pay any

amount. Further, the respondents herein also filed

calculation memo in page Nos.18 and 19 in which it appears

that they have paid an amount of Rs.51,13,353/- and

balance due as on 24.10.2019 was Rs.12,08,620/-. A perusal

of the order shows that the officer has not ascertained the

amount to be paid by Land Acquisition Officer. Though,

both the calculation memos are filed by both the counsel

and there was dispute regarding the amount to be paid by

them. The officer has not ascertained how much amount is

to be paid by the Land Acquisition Officer, but simply

passed orders in execution proceedings attaching the

movable properties of the office of the J.Dr. The contention

of the J.Dr., is that they have already deposited the entire

amount, whereas the D.Hrs., stated that there is still due of

Rs.12,08,620/- and it is for the Court to decide how much

amount is to be paid by the J.Dr., before issuing warrant

against the office of the Special Deputy Collector. But the

trial Court even without ascertaining the amount issued

attachment of movable properties and the order of the trial

Court is patently erroneous and is liable to be set aside.

5. In the result, the civil revision petition is allowed at

the admission stage and the matter is remanded to the trial

Court with a direction to ascertain the amount to be paid by

the revision petitioner/J.Dr., before issuing warrant of

attachment of movable properties of J.Dr., and then, pass

necessary orders. No order as to costs.

6. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

_________________________ JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

Date : 03.02.2023.

Note : CC by today (B/O) Yvkr