IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZUL PURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1504 OF 2008 Between: Kummeta Sai ......petitioner AND Boddu Veera Raghavamma and others ......Respondents The Court made the following:- THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZUL PURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1504 OF 2008 ORDER: The only grievance in this revision petition is that the petitioner’s application E.A.No.128 of 2008 is not being disposed of by the Court below. The petitioner, who is the decree holder No.3 claims that he was a minor on the date of passing of the decree and further asserts that he has not assigned his rights in the decree in favour of anybody. The application E.A.No.128 of 2008 is only with a prayer to declare the petitioner as major by discharging 12th respondent and also for a further relief not to execute the sale deed in favour of K.Sreeramulu or his alleged vendees. To the extent of declaring the petitioner as major there may not be any difficulty to pass appropriate orders. However, at the instance of the petitioner this revision was filed and stay of all further proceedings was obtained on 25.04.2008, because of which the said application remained undisposed. The learned counsel Sri M.V.S. Suresh Kumar appearing for the proposed successor to other decree holders has filed an application to implead and vacate the stay. The said application is opposed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that he has never assigned his rights and there is no authorized sale of rights of petitioner in favour of the said proposed party. However, all these matters are for the respective parties to agitate before the executing Court and it is for the executing Court to examine as to whether there is proper assignment of the decree in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders with regard to the rights of the parties. Sri M.V.S.Suresh Kumar, Learned counsel relied upon the orders of the executing Court in E.A.No.280 of 2006 dated 24.10.2006. However, though the counsel placed reliance upon said order of the executing Court in E.A.No.280 of 2006, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has already filed appropriate applications to recall all orders passed by the executing Court on the ground that the petitioner herein has never assigned his rights and he is not bound by the orders. It is open for the petitioners to raise all those contentions before the executing Court. I therefore deem it appropriate to dispose of this Civil Revision Petition directing the executing Court to consider and pass appropriate orders on the said E.As. within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter take further steps in accordance with law. No costs. ______________________ VILAS V.AFZUL PURKAR, J Date: 17.06.2010 Ivd