IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1341 OF 2010 Between: Smt. Pellapothu Padmavathi ..... Petitioner AND Valluri Nagarjuna ..... Respondent The Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1341 OF 2010 JUDGMENT: The Civil Revision Petition, under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, “C.P.C.”), is filed against the order, dated 22.02.2010, in E.P.No.153 of 2008 in O.S.No.189 of 2006, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ongole, whereunder and whereby, petition filed by the petitioner/decree holder under Order XXI Rules 37 and 38 of C.P.C. for arrest and committal of the respondent/judgment debtor to Civil Prison, was dismissed. 2. Heard. 3. The Execution Petition is filed by the petitioner/decree holder for recovery of the decreetal amount stating that the judgment debtor is working as Attender in Jawaharlal Nehru Navodaya Public School, Pellur Road, Ongole, Prakasam District and he is getting Rs.15,000/- as salary per month and is residing in a house at C.R.P. quarters and the same was sold recently and in that connection the judgment debtor received a huge amount, but he is wantonly and wilfully avoiding to satisfy the decree. 4. The same was denied by the judgment debtor and stated that he has got dependent mother aged about 80 years and wife and three children who are completely dependent on his salary and that he has to incur a huge expenditure towards the maintenance of the family and education of his children and that he has no capacity to discharge the debt. 5. No doubt, a finding has been recorded by the trial Court to show that the decree holder failed to prove that the judgment debtor has got means and intentionally evading to pay the E.P. amount, accordingly dismissed the same. Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. 6. To commit a judgment debtor to Civil Prison, the decree holder has to prove not only that judgment debtor has sufficient means to pay the amount but also that the judgment debtor was intentionally evading to pay the decreetal amount. That intention not to pay the amount is locked up in the mind of the judgment debtor. Therefore, it has to be gathered from the circumstances of the case. In spite of the fact that a specific plea is taken by the decree holder that the judgment debtor has sold away his house and received huge amount, but no proof is filed. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to remand the matter so that necessary evidence will be let in in the Execution Petition. In view of the fact that necessary documentary and other evidence has to be adduced with regard to the circumstances under which the judgment debtor is avoiding to pay the decreetal amount, it is a fit case to remand the matter. 8. Therefore, the impugned order, dated 22.02.2010, in E.P.No.153 of 2008 in O.S.No.189 of 2006, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ongole, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the trial Court for disposal of the E.P. afresh after giving opportunity to both parties to let in evidence within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, uninfluenced by any observation made in this Civil Revision Petition. 9. The Civil Revision Petition is allowed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ (K.C.BHANU, J) Dated: 3rd November, 2010. Note: Issue C.C. by one week. (B/o.) KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1341 OF 2010 3rd November, 2010. KL