IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4094 of 2008 Between: P.K.Raghavan Panickar ..... PETITIONER AND Bongu Venkataramanamma .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4094 of 2008 ORDER: Petitioner is the Judgment Debtor who suffered a decree dated 27.01.2005 in O.S.91/2001 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam. Respondent/plaintiff filed the E.P. for execution of the decree showing the address of the petitioner/J.Dr as “P.K.Raghavan Panikar, S/o.Sankaram Panikar, Hindu, aged 61 years, resident of D.No.28-16-7, Flat No.201, 2nd floor upstairs of the shop, by name Hydraulics and Pneumatics, Opp.Sivalayam, beside fire station, Suryabagh, Visakhapatnam-20”. It is stated that the said E.P. was filed under Or.21 Rule-37 r/w.Sec.55 CPC to conduct enquiry and to issue an order of arrest against J.Dr. and to commit him to civil prison. No docket proceedings have been filed. But the petitioner filed E.A. notice addressed to the petitioner. The address noted in the said notice is “P.K.Raghava Panickar, S/o.Sankara Panickar, Manikkoth Kandiyil House, Vaikkilassery (Po), Badagara (via), Calicut (Dist), Kerala – 673104” The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under Sec.39 CPC, the Court which passes a decree may, on the application of the decree holder, send it for execution to another Court of competent jurisdiction. Under Sec.39(4) CPC the Court which passes a decree has to execute the decree against the person or property within local limits of jurisdiction, but the same Court is not authorized to execute the decree against any person or property outside the local jurisdiction. Though in the E.P. the local address of the petitioner/J.Dr. is given, but in the notice the address of Kerala State was given. This Court while issuing notice before admission, granted stay of arrest of the petitioner. Despite service of notice, none appears for the respondent. A perusal of the impugned notice discloses that it is only a show cause notice as to why the matter should not be decided if the petitioner/J.Dr fails to appear before the Court below on the prescribed date of hearing. I am of the opinion that issuing of show cause notice outside the court jurisdiction is not bar, but the court cannot execute the decree outside its territorial jurisdiction against any person or property. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order as the same is being a show cause notice. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, if any execution of the decree outside the court jurisdiction is sought to be made by way of arrest or by any manner, it is always open to the petitioner to take appropriate steps, in accordance with law. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 18.11.2010 Dsr