IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5720 OF 2008 Between: Rajulapati Vijayalakshmi .....PETITIONER AND Uppalapati Bhogeswarrao and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5720 OF 2008 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short, “C.P.C.”), is directed against the order, dated 13.10.2008, in E.A.No.518 of 2008 in E.P.No.54 of 2003 in O.S.No.528 of 1992, on the file of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, whereunder and whereby, the petition, filed by the petitioner/third party to direct respondent Nos.3 to 5 not to execute sale deed, was dismissed on the ground that Section 47 C.P.C. applies only when questions arising between the parties to the suit in which the decree was passed or their legal representatives, and relating to the execution, discharge or the satisfaction of the decree shall be determined by the Court executing the decree. 2. Heard. 3. The claim of the petitioner is that she purchased the Execution Petition schedule property in a Court auction conducted by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, in E.P.No.16 of 2003 in O.S.No.2685 of 2002; that the sale was confirmed and Sale Certificate was issued. The first condition for applicability of Section 47 C.P.C. is that the question to be determined by the Court must be one arising between the parties to the suit or their representatives. In other words, where a question of decision does not arise between the parties to the suit or their representatives, it cannot be decided under this Section. In such a case, the remedy available, if any, to the petitioner is otherwise. Since the petitioner herein is not a party or representative of the parties to the decree in O.S.No.528 of 1992, she cannot file a petition under Section 47 C.P.C. Therefore, the executing Court rightly dismissed the same. Hence, the impugned order needs no interference by this Court. 4. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed leaving open the remedies available to the petitioner under law. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J February 10, 2011 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5720 OF 2008 February 10, 2011