THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5769 of 2010 Dt: 04-03-2011 Between: Yeggoni Venkayala Venkata Reddy …..Petitioner And S.V. Ramana Chenna Reddy @ Channa Reddy …..Respondent THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5769 of 2010 ORDER: The respondent filed O.S.No.59 of 2008 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda against the petitioner for recovery of certain amount. The suit was decreed and thereafter, the decree became final. The respondent filed E.P.No.21 of 2009 for attachment of certain items of movable property. At that stage, the petitioner filed E.A.No.105 of 2010 under Order XXI Rule 26 C.P.C. with a prayer to stay the proceedings in the E.P. In the affidavit filed in support of the E.A., the petitioner pleaded that he filed an I.P. in the same Court and that the item of property, which is sought to be proceeded in the E.P., is included in the schedule of properties in the I.P. He prayed for stay of proceedings in the E.P. The Executing Court dismissed the E.A. by order, dated 3.6.2010. Hence, this petition. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent. It appears that the respondent obtained ex parte decree against the petitioner and filed E.P. Since neither an appeal was filed nor application for setting aside the same, the ex parte decree was proceeded. The petitioner, in turn, has filed an I.P. in the same Court. The respondent herein is shown as one of the respondents in the I.P. The item of property, which is sought to be proceeded, is included in the schedule of the I.P. It may be true that the I.P. is yet to be numbered. However, the efforts made by the petitioner to seek adjournment to enable him to pursue the matter in the E.P., cannot be scuttled. It is settled principle of law that if proceedings under Provential Insolvency Act are instituted in respect of an item of property, no steps can be taken vis-à-vis that item including the execution of a decree. Further, even where the Judgment Debtor in an E.P. is arrested in the course of execution, Section 55(3) of C.P.C. mandates that the Executing Court shall inform him that he has the facility of being declared as an insolvent. Therefore, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The petitioner is granted one month time from the date of disposal of this revision, to take necessary steps in the I.P. and till such time, further proceedings in the E.P., shall stand stayed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________________ JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Dt: 04.03.2011 Note: C.C. in one week. Tjmr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5769 of 2010 DATE: 04.03.2011