THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NO.380, 381, 382 of 2010, 797, 1021 and 1022 of 2011 DATE: 29.7.2011 CRP 380 of 2010 BETWEEN: Tadikonda Siva Surya Prakasa Rao and ors petitioners And Gademsetty Subba Rao and another Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : M Janardhan Rao Counsel for the respondent no.1: Sri Appaiah Sharma Counsel for the respondent no.2: Sri E.V.S.s.Acharyulu The Court made the following order: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NOs. 380, 381, 382 of 2010, 797, 1021 and 1022 of 2011 COMMON ORDER: Since the parties and suit arising out of which these revisions are filed is one and the same and the issue raised in these revisions is similar, they are being disposed of by this common order. The petitioners in all these revisions are judgment debtors who suffered a decree dated 7.1.2003 in O.S.No. 502 of 1993 on the file of the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur. Mr. Gadamsetty Subba Rao, who is first respondent in CRP Nos. 380 to 382 of 2010 and second respondent in CRP Nos. 797, 1021 and 1022 is decree holder and Mr Golla Narayana Murthy who is second respondent in CRP Nos. 380 to 382 of 2010 and first respondent in CRP Nos. 797, 1021 and 1022 of 2011 is the auction purchaser. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in CRP No. 380 of 2010. Pursuant to decree, since the decretal amount was not paid, the decree holder filed E.P. No. 235 of 2003 for sale of the schedule property which is a double storied building bearing Door No. 13-4-33, admeasuring 550 sq.yards at Old Ward No.8, Block No.1, T.S. No. 3, Gunturvari Thota, Guntur municipality, Guntur. In the auction conducted by the court below in the execution proceedings, Mr Golla Narayana Murthy/ second respondent herein stood as highest bidder and declared as successful bidder and sale certificate was issued in his favour. Since the petitioners/judgment debtors failed to vacate the schedule premises and hand over the vacant possession, the second respondent herein/auction purchaser filed applications in E.A. No. 195 of 2010 to permit the Court amin to take the assistance of Municipal Surveyor to locate the property as per the schedule mentioned in the sale certificate, E.A No. 196 of 2010 to order for break open of the locks of the plaint schedule property while executing the delivery warrant by the Court amin and E.A. No. 197 of 2009 to grant police aid to Court amin for effective execution of the delivery warrant for delivery of the schedule property. The Court below by order dated 14.12.2009 allowed the said application, hence the present revisions in C.R.P.Nos. 380 to 382 of 2010 by the judgment debtor. The auction purchaser/second respondent filed EA No. 29 of 2011 under Rule 109 (2) of Civil Rules of Practice to advance the execution petition, E.A. No. 30 of 2011 under Section 151 of CPC to grant police aid, which were allowed by order dated 17.2.2011, against the said orders, the judgment debtors filed CRP No. 1021 and 1022 of 2011. Earlier the auction purchaser filed E.A. No. 182 of 2009 to direct the respondents 1 to 3 therein to vacate the schedule property and deliver vacant possession and the Court below by order dated 17.2.2011 ordered to issue delivery warrant on payment of batta and to issue police aid as ordered in EA 30 of 2011, against which CRP No. 797 of 2011 was filed. Heard the learned counsel for petitioners, learned counsel for first respondent/decree holder and learned counsel for second respondent/auction purchaser. It is not in dispute that the petitioners herein have suffered a decree in O.S. No. 502 of 1993 filed by Gademsetty Subba Rao/first respondent and as the decretal amount was not paid, the property of the revision petitioners was put to sale by auction and after following the due procedure the sale certificate was issued to the highest bidder /second respondent herein and the said proceedings have become final. As the auction purchaser/second respondent herein is entitled to enjoy the fruits of the decree, he filed the applications in E.A. Nos. 195 to 197 of 2009, to locate the property, break open the locks and to grant police aid to Court amin for effective execution of delivery warrant for delivery of the schedule property, and the said applications were rightly allowed by the Court below by order dated 14.12.2009. This Court does not see any infirmity legal or otherwise warranting any interference. The revision petitions fail and accordingly they are dismissed. No costs. ______________ V ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 29.7.2011 TVK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NOs. 380, 381, 382 of 2010, 797, 1021 and 1022 of 2011 DATE: 29.7.2011