IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTYSEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND TEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 4 0 7 of 2008 Between : Smt. Kommineni Narayanamma & 2-Ors. … Revision Petitioners- J.Drs. 1, 3, 4. V/s. Smt.Kanthamaneni Srilakshmi & Anr. … Respondents- Decree Holders Counsel for the Revision Petitioners: Sri Josyula Bhaskar Rao Counsel for the Respondents : Sri P. Gopal Das THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 4 0 7 OF 2008 O R D E R : Aggrieved of the docket order dated 28-12-2007 passed in EP.No. 189 of 2002 in OS.No. 332 of 1988 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, this Civil Revision Petition has been filed. 2. Heard both sides. At the instance of both sides, the main Revision is taken up for final disposal. 3. The Revision Petitioners herein are the judgment-debtors 1, 3 and 4. The first respondent herein is the decree holder and the second respondent is the judgment debtor No.2. 4. The main objection of the revision petitioners is that though he was set exparte in the earlier execution but the same have been set aside and the counter-affidavit raising several objections was not considered and straight away warrant has been issued. 5. On perusal of the entire proceedings and the chequered events goes to show that on 9-5-1985 there was contract of sale agreement between decree holder and judgment debtors 1 to 4. On 19-3-1996 the suit was decreed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur in favour of decree holder, who is the first respondent herein. On 03-11-1999, OS.No. 316 of 1999 filed by the son and daughter of Kommineni Narasimha Rao, the judgment debtor No.2 and second respondent in this Revision. On 28-2-2000 the sale deed executed by the Additional Subordinate Judge, Guntur in favour of decree holder on behalf of judgment-debtors 1 to 4 in EP.No.151 of 1997. On 07-9-2000, OS.No.24 of2001 was filed on the file of the Court of III Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Guntur by the son of Srinivasa Rao for cancellation of decree in OS.No.332 of 1988 obtained by decree holder. In August 2002, E.P.No.189 of 2002 was filed for the delivery of the property and the judgment debtors were served. On 04-2-2003 the executing court ordered for delivery of the property in EA.No. 248 of 2003 got filed by the minor children of the third judgment debtor Kommineni Srinivas Rao for 1/4th share in the schedule property and the same was dismissed. On 30-4-2005, OS.No.315 of 1999 filed by the son and daughter of K.Narasimha Rao, the judgment debtor No.2 was dismissed. On 09-10-2006, EA.No.281 of 2005 filed by Kolla Ravindra claim petition on the ground that he purchased the schedule property was dismissed, who was set up by the judgment debtors 1 to 4. On 23-01-2007, CMA.No. 974 of 2006 on the file of the High Court of AP filed by Kolla Ravindra against the orders in EA.No.281 of 2005 was dismissed. On 10-7- 2007, OS.No. 24 of 2001 filed by the sons of Srinivasa Rao, the third judgment debtor and second petitioner in CRP was dismissed by the VIII Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) Guntur. On 12-09- 2007, AS.No. 49 of 2007 filed by Kolla Ravindra against the orders in EA.No.281 of 2005 in EP.No. 189 of 2002 in OS.No.332 of 1988 was dismissed by the V-Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Guntur. On 16-11-2007, SA.No. 1270 of 2007 filed by Kolla Ravindra against the orders in AS.No.49 of 2007 was dismissed by the High Court of AP and on 30-1-2008 delivery warrant was issued. 6. On perusal of the counter filed by the petitioner, which has been filed across the bar, goes to show that the main objection is the factum of two suits; viz., the sons of Judgment debtors, Kommineni Dheeraj and Jai deep filed a partition suit, in OS.No. 24 of 2001 through their mother, who is next friend and the said partition suit is pending before the Court of IV Additional District Judge, Guntur and accordingly the sons of his brother, who is the second judgment debtor also filed another partition suit, OS.No.315 of 1999 which is pending before the Court of IV Additional District Judge, Guntur. Whereas both the suits were disposed of much earlier to the present order. OS.No. 24 of 2001 was dismissed on 07-9-2000 by the learned III-Additional District Judge,Guntur and whereas OS.No. 315 of 1999 filed by the son and daughter of judgment debtor No.2 was dismissed on 30-4-2005. Therefore, as on the date alleged warrant have not been pending and prima facie there is no valid or sustainable reasons to interfere in this matter. I do not see any reason to interfere in this matter while exercising the jurisdiction under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 7. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. ___________________________ JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO 27-04-2010. I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 4 0 7 OF 2008 CIRCULATION ENTRY No. 196 Date: 27-04-2010 Court Master : I s L Computer No. 43