THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5545 of 2009 05.12.2009 Between: Movva Nagendra Babu, S/o. Rama Rao … Petitioner and Smt.Chunduri Kusuma Kumari, W/o.Subba Rao … Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5545 of 2009 ORDER: Petitioner is Judgment Debtor (J.Dr) in E.P.No.49 of 2007. Respondent having obtained a money decree, which was not satisfied, filed the said E.P. under Order XXI Rule 37 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), for arrest and detention of J.Dr in civil prison for realising decree debt. The said E.P. was allowed on 07.10.2000. Aggrieved by the same, present civil revision petition is filed. Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that respondent failed to prove that J.Dr had sufficient means to discharge decree debt, and therefore, provisions of Order XXI Rule 37 of CPC are not attracted. Nextly, he submits that Court below erred in not taking note of the attitude of Decree Holder (D.Hr) in harassing the petitioner by filing E.P., for arrest and that property of J.Dr was attached and he gave undertaking not to alienate the property. When the matter was considered by Additional Senior Civil Judge, Eluru, respondent examined himself as P.W.1 and petitioner gave evidence as R.W.1. It came on record – and it was not denied; that petitioner owns Acs.5.00 of land and that he was having annual income of Rs.1,50,000/-, which was not specifically denied. Thus when the D.Hr pleaded that the J.Dr had sufficient means but failed to discharge decree debt, the burden shifts to J.Dr to prove the contra case. Though the petitioner gave evidence as R.W.1, he did not bring much rebuttal evidence. While admitting that he owns Acs.2.60, he pleaded helplessness because of ill-health. The decree was passed on 10.7.2003 and petitioner did not made any efforts to pay decree debt even though his appeal was dismissed by appellate Court. Therefore, when the question of fact is recorded by the Court below and on that basis an order was passed, no interference is called for. The civil revision petition is devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO,J) December 05, 2009 YS