THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI C.R.P. (SR) No. :26127 of 2010 Order: This C.R.P. is directed against the order of the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in E.P. No. 52 of 2010 in O.S. No.50 of 2010, whereby and whereunder the learned judge while posting the E.P. to 7th October, 2010 directed the 4th respondent-bank to withhold an amount of Rs, 4,00,00,000/- from the account of the petitioner. The facts in brief are that the respondent herein filed the suit in O.S. No. 50 of 2010 against the petitioner and two others for the relief of permanent injunction. Subsequently, the matter was referred to the Legal Services Authority, Hyderabad and the Legal Services Authority has passed an award on 29.4.2010 in the said suit in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties. However, when the judgment debtor failed to comply with the award, the respondent herein filed E.P. No. 52 of 2010 seeking attachment and the learned judge, through the impugned order, directed the respondent to withhold an amount of Rs. 4,00,00,000/- from the account of the petitioner. Hence, the present revision. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that even though the petitioner is not the judgment debtor, the learned judge directed the 4th respondent-bank to withhold an amount of Rs.4.00 crores. Further as per the agreement between the parties, if any dispute arises between the parties out of the agreement entered into between them, the same has to be referred to an Arbitrator and the Court below has no jurisdiction. Further, there is no amount of the judgment debtor lying with the petitioner and in such circumstances, the Court below ought not to have directed for withholding of the amount. He, therefore, prayed that the revision be allowed and the impugned order be set aside. Perused the impugned order. In view of the fact that the E.P. is still pending before the Court below, the petitioner can as well raise all the contentions urged in this C.R.P. before the Court below. Under the circumstances, without going into the merits of the matter, this C.R.P. is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to raise all the contentions urged in this revision before the Court below in the pending E.P., including the objection with regard to jurisdiction. No costs. ___________________ T.MEENA KUMARI,J Date: 8th October, 2010 pnb