THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITON NO.3712 OF 2009 DATED: 24-02-2011. Between 1.C.Krishna Murthy and another … Petitioners-J.Drs And I. M.Makamma and others …Respondents- D.Hrs THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITON NO.3712 OF 2009 ORDER: This revision is directed aggrieved by the order, dated 17-06-2009, in E.P.No.1 of 2007 in O.S.No.70 of 1983, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Palasa, in issuing warrant directing the J.Drs. to restore the suit pathway to its original position as per decree in O.S.70 of 1983 and A.S.1 of 1999 within 30 days from the date of order, failing which the bailiff shall execute the same and in such event, the D.Hrs. are at liberty to recover the costs incurred by them by attaching movable properties of the J.Drs for realization. 2. The short point that arises for consideration in this revision is whether the Execution Petition is maintainable after three years as provided under Article 135 of the Limitation Act, 1963? 3. Originally the suit was decreed on 24-11-1998 granting mandatory injunction. That judgment and decree was under challenge in A.S.No.1 of 1999 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Sompeta. The said appeal was dismissed as the appellants were absent on 08-08- 2006. Thereafter, Execution Petition was filed on 31-01-2007. The limitation for enforcement of decree granted for mandatory injunction is three years from the date of decree or where the date is fixed for performance such date. 4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, order of dismissal for default is not a decree within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of CPC. Since the appeal is continuous of the suit, after disposal of the appeal only, the parties can file application for enforcement of mandatory injunction as granted by the trial Court. Furthermore, the appellate Court has drafted the decree when the appeal was dismissed on 08-08-2006. Whether the appeal was dismissed in the absence of appellants or on merits, it makes no difference as far as drafting of decree by the appellate Court is concerned. Since the appeal is continuous of the suit, after disposal of the appeal only, the respondents herein will get right to enforce the decree. Therefore, the order under challenge needs no interference by this Court. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. --------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED: 24-02-2011 Hsd