IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEBER, TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI CIVIL RVISION PETITON No :2487 of 2009 Between: K.Vinod Kumar. PETITIONER. AND Sreedevi. .....RESPONDENT. ORDER: This Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 21st March, 2009 in E.P.No.529 of 2007 in O.S.No.252 of 2005 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantapur whereunder attachment of the salary of the Petitioner-defendant/Judgment Debtor has been ordered. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is not in dispute that O.S.No.252 of 2005 filed by the respondent-plaintiff for recovery of money allegedly due from the revision petitioner-defendant under a promissory note dated 10-03- 2002 was initially dismissed for default on 23-06-2005. Subsequently, on an application made by the respondent-plaintiff, the suit was restored on 18-08-2005 and on the same day, an exparte decree was passed. Pursuant thereto, the respondent herein filed an Execution Petition for the execution of the decree by attachment of the salary of the petitioner-defendant. It appears that the said Execution Petition was dismissed for default and thereafter, E.P.No.529 of 2007 has been filed in which the revision petitioner-defendant entered appearance on 29-10- 2007 and sought time for counter bringing to the notice of the Court that he had already filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. to set aside the exparte decree along with I.A.No.452 of 2006 to condone the delay of about 166 days. Though the said application is pending, the Court below has proceeded with the Execution Petition and directed attachment of salary by order dated 20-11-2007. Pursuant thereto, warrant dated 21-3-2009 has been issued for attachment of the salary of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, this Revision Petition has been filed. Having regard to the admitted fact that the suit was decreed exparte on 18-8-2005 and the petitioner’s application under order 9 Rule 13of C.P.C. to set aside the exparte decree is still pending, I am of the opinion that the Court below ought not to have proceeded with the Execution Proceedings without passing appropriate orders on merits on the application filed by the Revision Petitioner for setting aside the exparte decree. In the circumstances, the order under Revision is set aside and the Revision Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Court below to consider the petition filed by the revision petitioner for setting aside the exparte decree dated 18-08-205 and pass appropriate orders, following the due process of law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, it is open to the Court below to consider E.P.No.529 of 2007. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ___________________ Justice G.ROHINI Dated: 11th September, 2009. Dvs HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI ` CIVIL RVISION PETITON No :2487 of 2009 Dated: 11th September, 2009