IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5948 of 2006 Between: Bhupathi Sidartha Kumar. … Petitioner And Medisetti Appa Rao … Respondent This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 5948 OF 2006 ORDER:- This revision is directed against the orders of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada in not passing any orders in E.A.Nos.2729 and 2730 of 2006, against the orders in E.A.Nos.4304 and 4305 of 2005, seeking stay of further proceedings in E.P.No.166 of 2000, including the arrest of the petitioner. For due execution of the money decree passed in the suit, the above E.P. came to be filed for attachment of the petitioner’s salary, which according to him has been recovered for more than 29 months, contravening the provisions of Section 60 of the Civil Procedure Code. Since the Decree Holder got an order of arrest, the petitioner filed E.A.No.4304 of 2005 for setting aside the ex parte order passed in the E.P. and also E.A.No.4305 of 2005 to recall the arrest warrant. The said E.As., were dismissed for default, which were later restored and again dismissed. Against which, he preferred E.A.Nos.2729 and 2730 of 2006, seeking permission under Order 21 Rule 106 of the Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the dismissal order in the E.As, which have been adjourned from time to time. In view of the same, the present revision is filed. This court stayed all further proceedings in the E.P., including the arrest of the petitioner. In view of the same, when the matter is taken up for hearing on 29.01.2010, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought time for getting instructions as to whether the E.P. amount has been recovered or not. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the E.A.Nos.2729 and 2730 of 2006, filed to set aside the dismissal order passed in E.A.Nos.4304 and 4305 of 2005, have not been disposed of. In view of the same, this revision is disposed of directing the trial court to dispose of E.A.Nos.2729 and 2730 of 2006, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. __________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J 5th February 2010 lmv