THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4614 OF 2007 DATED: 31-01-2011 Between: S.Khaja Hussain. .... PETITIONER And S.Mymun Bi (died) & 5 others. .... RESPONDENTS ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 09-08-2007, in E.A.No.873 of 2007 in E.P.No.1342 of 2003 in O.S.No.41 of 2000 on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anantapur, wherein the said petition filed by the 2nd respondent herein to come on record, was allowed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent. Perused the record. 3. 2nd respondent herein is a third party to the proceedings. 1st respondent-decree-holder filed E.P.No.1342 of 2003 for recovery of the amount due under the decree in O.S.No.41 of 2000 against the petitioner-judgment-debtor. 2nd respondent filed E.A.No.873 of 2007 seeking to come on record as legal representative of the deceased-decree-holder on the ground that the decree-holder executed a Will in his favour bequeathing all her properties, including the decree in O.S.No.41 of 2000. The said application was allowed by the Execution Court by the impugned order. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that earlier the 2nd respondent herein filed E.A.No.1106 of 2004 seeking permission to get himself impleaded as 2nd decree-holder by way of consequential amendment. The said application was closed on 09-08-2007, the same day on which the impugned order was passed along with E.A.No.873 of 2007. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that in the earlier application, 2nd respondent described that the decree-holder is his grand mother whereas in the present application she is described as senior aunt. 6. Petitioner is disputing the Will. The 2nd respondent has to necessarily establish the genuineness of the Will and then he can seek the decretal amount as a legal representative of the deceased-decree-holder. It is open to the petitioner to raise all the objections, pertaining to the Will, and all contentions opposing the claim of the 2nd respondent herein as legal representative of the deceased-decree-holder in the execution proceedings after the 2nd respondent is impleaded. There cannot be any tenable objection for impleading the 2nd respondent herein as 2nd petitioner in the Execution Petition, subject to the condition that he shall establish the genuineness of the Will and also he is lawfully entitled to claim the decretal amount as legal representative of the deceased-decree- holder. In fact, the impugned order also makes such observation to the effect that the 2nd respondent herein can realize the decretal amount only if he establishes the genuineness of the Will. The Execution Court is therefore directed to conduct enquiry into the genuineness of the Will before proceeding further in the Execution Petition. 7. In the result, Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with the above direction. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 31st January, 2011. Tsy