THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5369 of 2011 DT.23.12.2011 Between: Jasti Aruna … Petitioner And Vattikuti Sridhar Rao … Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri M.V.Swamy Counsel for respondent: Sri The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5369 of 2011 O R D E R: The petitioner herein who is the defendant suffered a Judgment and Decree dated 2-9-2009 in O.S.No.139/2006 on the file of the II Senior Civil Judge, Fast Track Court, Guntur for a sum of Rs.1,27,266/- with costs and subsequent interest at 6% per annum from the date of the suit till the date of realisation. On 3-2-1009, he filed I.A.No.41 of 2009 in the said O.S.No.139 of 2006 under Order 20 Rule 11 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking permission to pay the decretal amount by way of instalment at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month till the realisation of the decretal amount. The trial Court by the impugned order dismissed the said application on the ground that without the consent of the decree holder no such instalment shall be granted, but before passing of the decree had the defendant requested by appearing personally or through pleader for payment of the amount by way of instalment, then the court would have considered. Aggrieved by the same, this revision is filed contending that the Court below ought to have granted permission to pay the amount in instalments. This revision is filed with delay in December 2009 and notice was ordered on 27-8-2010 and thereafter delay was condoned on 3-12-2011. It is stated that after the decree the petitioner has not paid any amount towards the decretal amount. In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that there cannot be any justification on the part of the petitioner in evading the decretal amount more so when she has stated in the grounds of revision that she has been paying the amounts by way of instalments at the rate of Rs.25,000/- once in two months. Had the petitioner paid at least Rs.25,000/- once in two months, she would have cleared the decretal amount by this time. Therefore, I see no reason to interfere with the order impugned. There are no merits in the revision and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 23-12-2011 grk THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5369 of 2011 DATE: 23-12-2011 grk