HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.1698 OF 2007 JUDGMENT: This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 05-01-2007 in E.A.No.1334 of 2006 in E.P.No.361 of 2002 in O.S.No.196 of 1998, on the file of the I- Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tanuku, wherein the executing Court has fixed the value of the schedule property at Rs.2,80,000/-. 2. None appeared for the petitioner/decree holder and no representation is made on his behalf. None appeared for the first respondent/judgment debtor, though served with notices. Perused the records. 3. The petitioner/decree holder obtained a decree against the first respondent/judgment debtor in O.S.No.196 of 1998. He filed E.P.No.361 of 2002 for execution of the same by bringing the schedule property to sale. The EP schedule property comprises a madras terrace residential building in an extent of 173 sq. yards and having two floors with a built up area of 1009 sq. feet situate in Aravalli village in Attili Mandal. 4. As can be seen from the market value certificate issued by the Registration and Stamps Department, the market value of the building together with the site is Rs.2,30,060/-. The respondent/first judgment debtor filed E.A.No.1334 of 2006 seeking fixation of the market value for the purpose of sale on the basis of the valuation certificate issued by the SRO, Attili on the ground that the value as assessed by the Amin and DHr is far too less. By the impugned order, the executing Court, having taken into consideration the valuation certificate issued by the SRO, fixed the market value of the schedule property at Rs.2,80,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, the DHr filed the present civil revision petition seeking reduction of the market value. 5. As the executing Court fixed the market value on the basis of the valuation certificate issued by the SRO, a public authority, the same cannot be taken exception to. The certificate discloses the particulars of the property and the nature and extent of the construction thereon. Having regard to the nature of the property, its location and the size of the building, the market value as revealed by the certificate issued by a public authority, the SRO, can reasonably be adopted for the purpose of fixing the upset price in the public auction. However, the certificate shows that the market value of the property is Rs.2,30,060/-. The executing Court, however, fixed the same at Rs.2,80,000/-, obviously for the reason that the market value will certainly be higher than the value noted in the books of the Sub-Registrar for the purpose of payment of the stamp duty. The upset price, as fixed by the executing Court, does not, therefore, call for any interference by this Court. 6. In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Interim suspension granted on 24-04-2007 stands vacated. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 17th June, 2010. Lrkm. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.1698 OF 2007 Between:- Velagala Srinivasa Reddy …Petitioner A n d Velagala Ramachandra Reddy and 3 others …Respondents