IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.782 of 2000 Between: M/s. Koulusir Electronics and another. ... PETITIONERS AND Andhra Bank, Kapra, Sainikpuri Branch, R.R. District, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioners : Mr. T. Subrahmanyam Counsel for the Respondent : None Appeared The Court made the following: ORDER: On 18.09.2009, I had passed the following order: “This revision is directed against the order of the trial Court in EP.No.69 of 1998 dated 31.12.1999. By the impugned order the trial Court had rejected the only objection of the judgment debtor that interest claimed in the EP is usurious. The Executing Court found that the claim for interest made by the respondent/decree holder is in terms of the decree and a ground of this nature cannot be raised in execution proceedings. The objection of the petitioner was accordingly rejected. In this revision petition, the learned counsel, who filed this revision is no more. Accordingly, by order dated 21.08.2009 the Office was directed to send notice to the petitioners to enable them to engage another counsel. The office has accordingly sent notice on 24.08.2009. However, no report of service is available from the record. None appears for the petitioners today also. Office to list the CRP next week with the report regarding service of notice and by printing the names of the petitioners and the respondent in the cause list.” 2. Even today, though the names of the parties are also printed in the cause list, nobody appears on either side. In view of that, the civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J September 25, 2009 DSK