HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.234 of 2008 ORDER: The order under challenge in this revision is the order passed by the Junior Civil Judge, Palakol in E.P. No.29 of 2007 in O.S. No.483 of 1977 dated 01.11.2007. In the order under revision, the Court below observed that the Execution Petition was filed by the decree holder, under Order XXII Rule 43 C.P.C, against the judgment debtor for sale of the schedule mentioned movable properties of the judgment debtors, after attachment; and there were no tenable objections in the counter affidavit filed by the judgment debtor. The Court below directed issuance of notice and attachment warrant under Rule XXI Rule 43 C.P.C. Order XXI Rule 22 C.P.C. requires a notice to be given to show cause against execution in certain cases and Order XXI Rule 43 enables attachment of movable property, other than agricultural produce, in the possession of judgment debtor and, thereunder, where the property to be attached is movable property, other than agricultural produce, in the possession of the judgment- debtor, attachment shall be made by actual seizure, and the attaching officer shall keep the property in his own custody or with one of his subordinates, and shall be responsible for the due custody thereof. Even before this Court the petitioners have not shown any valid reason for interference against the order of the Learned Junior Civil Judge, much less any patent illegality therein, or manifest injustice having resulted thereby to the petitioners. I see no reason, therefore, to exercise discretion under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to interfere in the matter. The Civil Revision Petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. ____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Date: 01.07.2010 MRKR