IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.R.P.NO.3050 OF 2010 Date:17.03.2011 Between:- Sri Peruboina Kondal Rao ..Petitioner/JDR/defendant And Sri Chinthakani Malsoor .. Respondent/DHR/Plaintiff ORDER:- This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 13.04.2010, passed in E.P.No.175 of 2008 in O.S.No.808 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Khammam, whereunder and whereby, petition filed under Order XXI Rules 37 and 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, C.P.C.’) for issuance of warrant of arrest against judgment debtor and put him in civil prison for realization of E.P. amount, was allowed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/judgment debtor contended that the petitioner is having two children, that he is working as a labourer and getting Rs.1,500/- per month and he is not having sufficient means to pay the decretal amount, that except his daily wages, he has no other source of income to pay the decretal amount and therefore, prays to set aside the impugned order. 3. Under Order XXI Rule 37, two requirements are to be satisfied for sending the judgment debtor to civil prison. Firstly, the judgment debtor is having means to pay the decretal amount. Secondly, judgment debtor is willfully or wantonly avoiding to pay the decretal amount. The provision relating to arrest and detention of the judgment debtor protects and safeguards the interests of the decree holder. If the judgment debtor has means to pay and still he refuses or neglects to honour his obligations, he can be sent to civil prison. The evidence of decree holder would go to show that he obtained a decree against the judgment debtor on 15.02.2008 and after execution proceedings, he paid amount of Rs.5,000/- and though he has means to pay the amount, he was wantonly avoiding to pay the decretal amount. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner has paid an amount of Rs.5,000/- after filing the Execution Petition. The petitioner is no other than the nephew of the decree holder. Even according to the judgment debtor, he is getting Rs.1,500/- per month. After passing the decree, the judgment debtor has not made any efforts to pay part of the decretal amount. So from the evidence of decree holder, it can be said that the judgment debtor is having sufficient means to pay the decretal amount, but evading to ay the same wantonly or willfully. Therefore, the trial Court rightly allowed the petition and ordered issuance of warrant. That order needs no interference by this Court. However, the order of the executing Court is kept under abeyance for a period of three (3) months from today to enable the petitioner to pay the remaining decretal amount, failing which the order of the executing Court shall be given effect to. 5. With the above observation, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _​_____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 17th March, 2011 AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.R.P.NO.3050 OF 2010 Date:17.03.2011 AMD