IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 3035 of 2000 Between: Katuri Ananda Rao …… petitioner AND Sabari Girisa Finance and Chit Funds pvt.Ltd, Vijayawada and others ......Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following:- ORDER: Heard Sri V.S.R.Anjaneyulu, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner. Though served with notice, none appears for respondent No.1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 26.07.2000 in E.P.No.916/1999 in O.S.No.1439/1996 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada. In the E.P. filed by the respondent/decree holder against the revision petitioner/3rd Judgment debtor, for realization of the decretal amount by means of arresting the revision petitioner and remanding him in civil prison, the Executing Court arrived at the finding that the revision petitioner is having sufficient means to pay the decretal amount and he willfully neglected to pay the same and accordingly passed the impugned order issuing warrant of arrest against the revision petitioner. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that in fact there was no material before the Executing Court indicating that the revision petitioner was having sufficient means to pay the decretal amount and that he willfully neglected to pay the same and more particularly, having observed in para-9 of its order, which specifically states that the decree holder failed to adduce any positive evidence to show that the revision petitioner is possessing movable and immovable properties and bank balance and so on, as contended by him, and thereby failed to prove his contentions and that the trial Court erroneously ordered the arrest of the revision petitioner merely basing on Ex.A1, salary certificate, which shows that the revision petitioner was getting salary of Rs.5,000/- per month. It has been further submitted that the revision petitioner was having no means of income other than his monthly salary for his livelihood and other liabilities, which were mentioned by him in his counter. Perusal of the order passed by the learned Executing Court does not indicate that, in fact, any enquiry has been conducted as to the actual capacity of the revision petitioner to pay the decretal amount or any substantial part thereof. The Executing Court merely placing reliance on Ex.A1, salary certificate, concluded that the revision petitioner had enough means to discharge his decretal amount without considering his liabilities. However, the impugned order was passed by the Executing Court on 18.07.2000 by which time the revision petitioner was in service and by this time, he might have been retired from service and his capacity, to repay the decretal amount accrued so far or to pay any substantial part thereof, is not known. Since, several years have been lapsed, the impugned order, issuing warrant of arrest against the revision petitioner so as to detain him in civil prison, cannot be sustained in law, unless it is made after making a fresh enquiry into the means of the revision petitioner. The order is, therefore, liable to be set aside. In the result, the order passed in E.P.No.916/1999 in O.S.No.1439 of 1996 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada on 26.07.2000 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the Court below with a direction to conduct a fresh enquiry in the E.P. and to pass necessary orders in accordance with law. The civil revision petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ October 6, 2009. (R.KANTHA RAO, J) Ivd