IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4610 OF 2009 BETWEEN Surisetty Venkata Suri Appa Rao amd another. …PETITIONERS AND Mangala Venkata Bhavani …RESPONDENT Counsel for the petitioners: SMT. S.A.V. RATANAM Counsel for the Respondent: MR. Y. VIVEKANANDA SWAMY The Court made the following: - ORDER: The judgment debtors in EP.No.22 of 2008 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, seeks to question the order of the executing Court dated 10.11.2008 rejecting their objection to the sale of attached property. 2. The petitioners contended that the attached property does not belong to them but belongs to one Mudukerthy Ellaiah. The Court below, however, found that there is no material in support of the said plea and ordered sale notice under Rules 64 and 66 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 3. This Court while issuing notice on admission on 09.10.2009 granted interim stay on condition of the petitioners depositing 1/3rd of the decretal amount within four weeks. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the said order was complied with. 4. Insofar as the merits of the CRP are concerned, I am unable to see any error in the impugned order, as the property in question has been under attachment from 27.07.2004 onwards and if the contention of the petitioners that the property belongs to somebody else is assumed to be correct, there is no reason as to why the petitioners are objecting the sale of the said attached property. Apparently, the property belongs to the petitioners/judgment debtors and only to avoid and drag on the execution proceedings this contention is raised. The Court below has rightly rejected the same. 5. I am, therefore, not inclined to interfere and the revision petition is liable to be dismissed. However, as the petitioners have complied with the interim order and deposited 1/3rd of the EP amount, the petitioners are granted time till end of February 2011 to deposit the balance amount to the credit of EP failing which the executing Court shall be free to proceed with the execution in accordance with law. The amount deposited by the petitioners in pursuance of the interim order and if deposited in pursuance of this order, shall be permitted to be withdrawn by the decree holder without furnishing any security. The civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J November 23, 2010 DSK