IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.646 of 2010 Between: A.Bhagyalakshmi ..... PETITIONER AND Tadikonda Srinivasa Rao .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.646 of 2010 O R D E R: Petitioner is the Judgment Debtor No.9 who suffered a decree in O.S.40/1999 on the file of the III Addl.District Judge, Guntur. As the decretal amount was not paid, E.P.51/2007 was filed by the Decree Holder. In the said E.P. the petitioner herein filed E.A.504/2009 under Sec.151 CPC disputing the E.P.amount and her liability, and sought for dismissal of the E.P. against her. The Court below considered the said application and held that admittedly the petitioner herein suffered a decree, she being Judgment Debtor No.9. There is no dispute about the decree passed against the petitioner herein and others and the said decree has become final. Admittedly, the decretal amount was not paid. If that be so, the decree is liable to be executed against any Judgment Debtor or against all the Judgment Debtors. Accordingly, the E.A. was dismissed. This Court while issuing notice before admission, granted interim stay, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing an amount of Rs.2 lakh within a period of 8 weeks, and on such deposit, the decree holder is permitted to withdraw the same without furnishing any security. It is stated that the said amount was not deposited, and more so, a petition seeking extension of time was filed stating that only a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was deposited by the petitioner. This Court granted further time for depositing the remaining amount by order dated 16.04.2010. Heard both the counsel. I have perused the impugned order. Petitioner being Judgment Debtor, she cannot demand or insist the Court to recover the E.P. amount from the other Judgment Debtors. It is for the decree holder who can choose and proceed against any one of the Judgment Debtors for recovery of E.P.amount. Therefore, I do not see any infirmity legal or otherwise to interfere with the impugned order. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 15.07.2011 Dsr