THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4341 of 2011 DT.11.11.2011 Between: Naru Srinivasa Reddy s/o Naru Swamy Guruva Reddy … Petitioner And Meguga Krupamma w/o Issac & 2 others … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Koneti Raja Reddy Counsel for respondent: Sri The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4341 of 2011 ORDER: This revision is filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India against the action of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur in not disposing of E.A.No.198 of 2010 in E.A.No.184 of 2010 in E.P.No.485 of 2009 in O.S.No.130 of 2009 seeking police aid to break open the locks of the tenants of the judgment-debtors 1 and 2. It is stated that the petitioner is the auction purchaser of the property of the Judgment-debtors 1 and 2 in the E.P proceedings filed by the decree-holder, the 3rd respondent herein in E.P.No.485 of 2009 in O.S.No.130 of 2009, on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur. As the judgment-debtors failed to pay the decretal amount, the decree-holder brought the property of the judgment-debtors 1 and 2 for sale, and accordingly, open auction was conducted on 22-06-2010 and the petitioner became successful bidder and the sale stood in his favour for a sum of Rs.18,85,000/- for which a sale certificate was also issued on 6-9-21010. After obtaining the sale certificate, he filed E.P.No.184 of 2010 for delivery of the suit schedule property through the Court, and accordingly, delivery warrant was issued on 30-11-2010, but when the Field Agent visited the schedule property, it was found in possession of certain persons. As the judgment debtors refused to delivery the possession, the Field Agent returned the delivery warrant on 9-12-2010 with an endorsement to the effect that the tenants are not co-operating for implementing the delivery warrant and there is obstruction from the tenants of the judgment-debtors. In the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the opinion that the tenants cannot be evicted in the execution proceedings, but however, the suit scheduled property has to be delivered as it is where it is position and the tenants to pay rents whatsoever in favour of the judgment holder. However, I am not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the merits of the case inasmuch as it is stated that the said E.A is not being disposed of for one reason or the other. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the revision is disposed of directing the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur to dispose of the said E.A.No.198 of 2010 in E.A.No.184 of 2010 in E.P.No.485 of 2009 in O.S.No.130 of 2009, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay. No costs. _______________ (V.ESWARAIAH,J) DATE: 11.11.2011 grk along with the tenancy and ownership rights with the judgment-debtors shall attorn the property instructing the tenants to pay the rents whatsoever in favour of the judgment holder. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. DT.11.11.2011 GRK