THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5373 of 2011 DT.23.12.2011 Between: Devarakonda Srinivasa Rao … Petitioner And Kallapoalli Sri Lakshmi & another … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri B.Venkateswarlu Counsel for respondent: Sri The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5373 of 2011 O R D E R: This revision is filed aggrieved by the order dated 11-3-2010 in E.A.No.32 of 2010 in E.P.No.1127 of 2007 in O.S.No.11 of 2004, on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur. It is the case of the petitioner that he is the auction purchaser of the suit schedule property conducted by the Court in execution of E.P.No.117/2007 in O.S.No.11 of 2004, on the file of the I Additional Junior civil Judge, Guntur. The petitioner further states that the sale certificate was also issued, but the possession was not delivered. As there was resistance from the 3rd parties, the petitioner sought for the police aid. It is stated that one Sripathi Mery Kumari filed claim petition under Order 21 Rule 97 to 101 r/w 47 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure independently claiming the said E.P Schedule Property and the said claim petition is admittedly pending on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur. It is stated that the Court below while dismissing the application filed by the petitioner seeking police aid, erroneously observed that as there is resistance from the objector and the remedy available to the auction purchaser/petitioner is to file a suit for recovery of possession basing on the sale certificate. I am of the opinion that the said observations of the Court below are illegal and unsustainable. No doubt, it is true that when the claim petition is filed, the police aid cannot be given. Therefore, insofar as the rejection of the said application in view of the pendency of the claim petition, cannot be faulted with, but however insofar as the finding of the Court below that “if there is any resistance from the Lawful objectors, the only remedy is to the auction purchaser to file suit for recovery of the possession basing on the sale certificate which can be treated as a sale deed” is set aside Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the C.R.P is allowed and the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Court below with a direction to consider the said E.A.No.32 of 2010 in E.P.No.1127 of 2007 in O.S.No.11 of 2004 along with the claim petition filed by one Sripathi Mery Kumari as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay. No costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 23.12.2011 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5373 of 2011 DT.23.12.2011 grk