THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.5351 OF 2008 DATED 20TH APRIL, 2010 BETWEEN Mangalagiri Ramanaiah … Petitioner And Katakala Eswaramma … Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.5351 OF 2008 ORDER: This revision petition at the instance of the Judgment Debtor is directed against the order dated 14.10.2008 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Kavali, ordering E.P.No.30 of 2007. The said E.P. was filed by the respondent herein who obtained a mortgage decree against the petitioner/Judgment Debtor in O.S.No.39 of 2004. The said E.P. was filed seeking attachment and sale of the mortgaged property, which is a house bearing No.8-35-57/A in Survey No.2016 consisting of 24 ankanams of site equal to 192 square yards situated in 8th Ward of Kavali Town and Municipality. The petitioner/Judgment Debtor resisted the said E.P. on the ground that the said house property existed on a Government land and the same was assigned to him and that he was only having D-Form patta right and therefore the said property cannot be proceeded against in execution of the decree. The respondent/decree holder contested the said plea and in the impugned order the Executing Court found that the very same contention was raised by the petitioner/Judgment Debtor in the suit as well and after elaborate trial the said claim of the petitioner/Judgment Debtor was rejected in the suit. Similar ground was once again taken by the petitioner/Judgment Debtor in the E.P. and consequently the same was not accepted. In the present revision petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner/Judgment Debtor reiterates the said contention and submits that this Court having found prima facie case had granted interim stay on 11.12.2008 which continues to operate. Heard both sides. It is a matter of record that the very same contention that the schedule property is an assigned land which was rejected in the suit and the finding in the suit has become final. The petitioner/Judgment Debtor further admitted that no document was filed by petitioner/Judgment Debtor to substantiate the aforesaid contention. That apart, the examination of Mandal Revenue Inspector as R.W.2 clearly shows that the entire file pertaining to assignment has been misplaced and as such even the Government records do not show any patta granted to the petitioner/Judgment Debtor. Even otherwise, the petitioner/ Judgment Debtor cannot succeed in revision as the Executing Court cannot go behind the decree and the said issue with respect to the attachability of the suit house was gone into during the course of the suit itself and attachment was also made absolute. In the circumstances, the revision petition is clearly devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. Alternatively, the learned counsel for the petitioner/ Judgment Debtor submits that since the outstanding E.P. amount as on the date of filing of the E.P. being Rs.1,44,390/- the petitioner/Judgment Debtor be granted three instalments to enable him to pay the same. The learned counsel for the respondent/decree holder however submits that the petitioner has been enjoying absolute unconditional stay pending this revision petition and he is therefore not entitled to any indulgence of this Court. However, I am of the considered view that the request made on behalf of the petitioner/Judgment Debtor is reasonable and if he is granted three months time the entire E.P. amount outstanding as of today would be repaid by him. The petitioner/Judgment Debtor shall therefore pay the entire E.P. amount, which is due as of today and payable to the respondent/decree holder, in three monthly equal instalments which shall be deposited before the Court below on 01.06.2010, 01.07.2010 and 01.08.2010 respectively. On such deposit, the respondent/decree holder shall be entitled to withdraw the same without furnishing any security. In the event of any default committed by the petitioner/Judgment Debtor in depositing any of the instalments of E.P. amount as directed hereinabove, the Executing Court shall be free to proceed against the petitioner/Judgment Debtor in accordance with law. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J. 20TH APRIL, 2010. VGSR/PGS