THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NO. OF 1591 of 2010 DATE: 4.2.2011 BETWEEN: Nambaru Gangaraju petitioner And Smt Varakavi nageswari respondent Counsel for the petitioner : Mr karri Suryanarayana Counsel for the respondents: Mr P Srinivas Kumar The Court made the following order: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NO. 1591 of 2010 ORDER: This revision under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, is filed questioning the order dated 9.2.2010 in E.P. No. 200 of 2009 in O.S. No. 2988 of 2004 passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chodavaram allowing an application filed under Order 21 Rule 7, 38 and 55 of Civil Procedure Code, and issuing arrest warrant against the petitioner /judgment debtor on payment of process. The respondent herein is decree holder, who obtained a decree dated 24.7.2007 in O.S.No. 2988 of 2004 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakapatnam for recovery of Rs.84,589/-. Since the decretal amount was not paid, the respondent herein initiated execution proceedings and filed E.P. No. 200 of 1999 for recovery of decretal amount together with costs and interest totalling to Rs.1,08,268/-, alleging that though the petitioner has sufficient means to satisfy the decree, he is not paying the decretal amount and sought for arrest of the petitioner and to send him to civil prison. On consideration of the matter, the court below, allowed the petition and ordered to issue arrest warrant against the petitioner. Hence, the present revision. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the judgment debtor in his cross examination, admitted that he is working as Village Revenue Officer in Revenue Department and posted at Makavarapalem and sought permission of the Court to permit him to repay the due amount in instalments, but the Court below refused to grant instalments and ordered for arrest of the petitioner. It is further stated that this Court while issuing notice before admission, by order dated 16.4.2010 granted interim stay subject to condition of payment of half of the decretal amount and accordingly half of the decretal amount is paid and that the petitioner is ready to pay the balance decretal amount in instalments. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and leaned counsel for respondent and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, there is no dispute as regards the due amount and it is the case of the judgment debtor before the Court below that decree holder did not ask him to pay the due amount prior to filing the execution petition and that he is ready to repay the decretal amount in instalments, in such circumstances, ordering for arrest of the judgment debtor is unsustainable and liable to be set aside. Further, in terms of the orders of this Court dated 16.4.2010 the petitioner is stated to have deposited half of the decretal amount and ready to pay the balance amount in instalments, as such this Court deems it fit to permit him to repay the balance decretal amount in instalments. In the circumstances, the revision petition is disposed of, permitting the petitioner to pay the balance decretal amount in two equal monthly instalments, first of which shall be paid by the end of February, 2011 and the second instalment shall be paid by the end of March, 2011. In default of payment of any of the instalments as directed above, this order stands vacated and the respondent/decree holder is at liberty to execute the decree. Subject to above, the revision stands disposed of. No costs. ______________ V ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 4.2.2011 TVK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NO. 1591 pf 2010 DATE:4.2.2010