HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1252 of 2011 ORDER: The respondent filed O.S.No.659 of 2007 on the file of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, against the petitioner for eviction from the suit schedule property. An ex parte decree was passed on 31.12.2007. The petitioner filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. with a prayer to set aside the ex parte decree and since there was delay in filing the same, he filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. That was dismissed by the trial Court. Thereupon, he filed Civil Revision Petition No.4656 of 2010 before this Court. The Civil Revision Petition was allowed on 24.09.2010, by imposing a condition that the petitioner shall deposit the arrears of rent before the trial Court within four weeks from the date of the order. Taking the view that the direction as to deposit of arrears of rent as not justified, since there did not exist any relationship of lessor and lessee, the petitioner filed a Review C.M.P. in Civil Revision Petition No.4656 of 2010. In the meanwhile, the respondent filed E.P.No.69 of 2008 for execution of the decree. Through its order, dated 23.02.2011, the trial Court allowed the E.P. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The ex parte decree was set aside by this Court by imposing a specific condition that the petitioner shall pay the arrears of rents within four weeks from the date of order. In case, the petitioner wanted to reap the benefit of the said order, he ought to have paid the arrears of rent. Failure on his part to do so has resulted in the decree to remain in tact. Therefore, the respondent has filed the E.P. The petitioner is not able to point out any factual or legal error in the order. The mere pendency of Review Petition before this Court does not relieve the petitioner from the obligation to pay the arrears of rent and the failure in that behalf has made the decree enforceable. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. In case, the petitioner is evicted from the suit schedule property, it shall be subject to the outcome of the Review Petition filed by him in Civil Revision Petition No.4656 of 2010. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY 27th June 2011 DR