THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.3454 OF 2002 ORDER This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 18-06-2002 in EP No.506 of 2001 in O.S.No.127 of 2001 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Nandyal, wherein the EP filed by the respondent herein under Order XXI, Rules 37 and 38 CPC for realization of the decree amount of Rs.60,832/- , was allowed by ordering the arrest of the petitioner- Judgment debtor. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared for the respondent. Perused the records. It is not disputed that the respondent herein obtained a decree against the petitioner on 12-10-2001 for realization of the amount due under the decree. The EP was filed seeking arrest of the judgment-debtor on the ground that in spite of having sufficient means, judgment-debtor is neglecting to pay the amount. Judgment-debtor contested the EP on the ground that he had no means to pay the amount. During the enquiry, decree holder was examined as PW1 and judgment-debtor was examined as RW1 and another witness was examined as R.W.2. As seen from the impugned order, judgment- debtor was having a house site, which he sold subsequent to passing of the decree and just before filing of the EP. The contention of the decree holder as PW1 is that in spite of having solid cash on hand by way of sale proceeds of the house site, the judgment- debtor is not discharging the decree debt. Learned counsel for the petitioner-judgment debtor would submit that the judgment debtor also filed an insolvency petition as he was unable to discharge the debts. The impugned order shows that no copy of the insolvency petition was produced to show that an insolvency petition was filed and what assets and liabilities were disclosed therein. Admittedly, the judgment-debtor is not adjudged as an insolvent and no interim protection was also granted to him in the EP. In the circumstances, the impugned order, holding that the judgment debtor is evading to pay the decree debt in spite of having sufficient means, does not call for any interference. There are no merits in this civil revision petition. In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY,J rkk Dated: 25-4-2011