THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRP No.4167/2009 and CRPMP No.7336/2009 Dt.13-11-2009 Darisi Satyanarayana ..Petitioner v. Darisi Hari Narayana ..Respondent THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRP No.4167/2009 and CRPMP NO.7336/2009 ORAL ORDER The revision petitioner herein is the Judgment Debtor-defendant in EP No.6/2009 on the file of the court of Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram. He filed the present revision petition against the orders of that court dt. 12-8- 2009 passed in EP No.6/2009 in OS No.105/2004, whereunder petition filed by the respondent-Decree Holder-plaintiff under Order 21 Rule 11 CPC was allowed. The suit, OS No.105/2004, filed by the plaintiff for specific performance or in the alternative refund of advance amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. The said suit was decreed, on 9-5-2007, directing the defendant to pay Rs.3,00,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization. Questioning the same, the defendant carried the matter in appeal, AS No.125/2007, before III Additional District Judge, Kakinada with an application for staying the execution of the decree passed in OS No.105/2004. Learned District Judge stayed the decree on condition of the defendant depositing suit costs and Rs.1 lakh by the end of October, 2007. Since the defendant did not comply with the said order, the plaintiff filed the above EP. The Executing Court allowed EP and ordered for issuance of arrest warrant. Questioning the same, the present revision petition is filed. This court while issuing notice before admission on 28-8-2009 stayed the arrest on condition of the petitioner-judgment debtor depositing 50% of the EP amount and costs within six weeks from the date of order. The petitioner now represents that said conditional order has been complied with. The respondent-decree holder filed CRPMP No.7336/2009 for vacating the order passed by this court dt. 28-8-2009. Once the petitioner-decree holder failed to comply with the order passed by the appellate court staying execution of the decree, the executing court is justified in ordering EP. In view of the same, no infirmity is discernible in the order passed by the executing court warranting interference. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. CRPMP No.7336/2009 is also dismissed. However, six (6) months time is granted for depositing the balance of decretal amount. Failure to pay the amount before the stipulated period, it is always open for the executing court to execute the arrest warrant. The respondent-decree holder can withdraw the amount deposited pursuant to the order passed by this court dt. 28-8-2009 without furnishing any security and balance amount ordered to be deposited by the petitioner-judgment debtor will abide by the result of the appeal ie., AS No.125/2007 on the file of III Additional District Judge, Kakinada. No costs. ______________ A.GOPAL REDDY,J Dt.13-11-2009 kmr