HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH C.R.P. No. 328 of 2011 DATED: 18.02.2011 Between: Vudi Ramulu .. Petitioner- Jdr. And K. Sreenivasa Rao .. Respondent-Dhr. O R D E R:- This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 29.11.2010 made in E.A. No. 1 of 2010 in E.P. No. 141 of 2006 in O.S.No. 52 of 1998, whereby the petition filed by the plaintiff under Order 18, Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC to recall RW1 for further cross examination by putting material questions about the means of the defendant, was allowed. The petitioner herein is the judgment debtor, who suffered a decree dated 16.06.2006 in O.S. No. 52 of 1998 on the file of X Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Tract Court), Visakhapatnam at Anakapalli. As the decretal amount Rs.13,70,297/- and the costs of Rs.45,697/- were not paid, the respondent-decree holder filed E.P. No. 141 of 2006 under Order 21 Rule 37 CPC for recovery of the decretal amount and to issue notice to the petitioner herein so as to send him to civil prison if he fails to pay the decretal amount. He also filed E.A. No.1 of 2010 under Order 18, Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC for the purpose of recalling the petitioner-J.Dr., who was examined as RW1, for further cross-examination to put nefarious questions about his means in the interest of justice. Counter affidavit in the application was filed stating that he was already cross- examined and there are no bona fides on the part of the respondent- D.Hr to recall the petitioner-J.Dr for the purpose of further cross- examination, however the petition was allowed. Challenging the same, the petitioner-J.Dr. has filed the present Civil Revision Petition. Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and carefully analysed the material placed on record, I am of the view that when the decree holder filed E.P seeking arrest of the judgment- debtor, the burden of proof whether the judgment debtor is having sufficient means or not, entirely rests with the decretal holder. Therefore, no prejudice will be caused to the petitioner-J.Dr. if he is further cross-examined. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity or irregularity in the order impugned in this revision petition. Hence, I see no merits in this Civil Revision Petition, and the same is, accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J 18.02.2011 bcj