THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P.No.5906 of 2006 O R D E R: No representations on either side, though the matter was passed over and called again in the afternoon. The revision arises out of the orders of the Executing Court which process was invoked by the respondent herein for recovery of the maintenance amount decreed in her favour in O.P.No.22 of 1995. The amount under Execution Petition was a sum of Rs.78,000/- covering the period of maintenance from 01.01.1997 to 01.08.2003 @ Rs.1,000/- per month. On account of the default committed by the petitioner/judgment debtor, the respondent sought orders of arrest against the petitioner on the ground that though the petitioner has sufficient means, he is avoiding to comply with the decree. The Executing Court had recorded evidence of PW.1 and R.W.1 and came to the conclusion that the respondent is entitled to recover maintenance amount from the petitioner from 01.08.2000 to 01.08.2003 @ Rs.1,000/- per month totaling to Rs.36,000/- ie., for a period of three years preceeding the E.P. It had also directed the petitioner herein to pay the said amount within one month, failing which arrest was ordered. Questioning the said order, the present revision was filed and on 24.11.2006 and while admitting the Civil Revision Petition, this Court granted interim stay on condition of the petitioner depositing 1/3rd of the E.P. amount within four weeks. The said order was reportedly complied with and based on that, further order was passed on 29.12.2009 permitting the respondent to withdraw the said amount. Thereafter, a vacate petition was filed by the respondent in C.R.P.MP.No.6946 of 2009 on which the following order was passed by this Court on 19.4.2009: “Interim order is made absolute subject to the condition of the revision petitioner depositing balance of the decretal amount on or before 30.6.2010, in default, the stay stands vacated. If the amount is so deposited, the vacate stay petitioner is permitted to withdraw the same without furnishing any security.” Whether the said order is complied with or not is not reported to the Court by either side. In view of the finding of the Executing Court that the petitioner has already received substantial amounts towards his terminal benefits and that he has means to pay the decretal amount, but evaded to pay the same, I am not able to see any error or perversity in the impugned order. Revision petition is accordingly liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. However, only as an indulgence, if the petitioner has not complied with the order dated 19.4.2010 referred to above petitioner is granted one more month’s time to comply with the order of the Executing Court, failing which Executing Court shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in execution of the decree in accordance with law. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR,J 8th September, 2010 PNV