IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3439 OF 2011 Date:23.08.2011 Between:- M/s.Indecor Laminates Pvt.Ltd, rep.by M.R.Jesrani .. Petitioner And Central Warehousing Corporation, rep.by Regional Manager, Hyderabad. .. Respondent ORDER: The Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of Constitution of India, is directed against the prohibitory order, dated 24.03.2011, in E.P.No.4 of 2005 in O.S.No.1330 of 1993 on the file of II Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 2. The respondent herein filed O.S.No.1330 of 1993 on the file of II Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad against the petitioner herein and the same was partly decreed for Rs.2,98,413/-. The respondent filed E.P.No.4 of 2005 for recovery of Rs.7,39,262/- wherein the impugned order was passed prohibiting transfer of E.P. schedule property. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed this Revision Petition. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as per Section 142(1)(c)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs may prepare a certificate signed by him specifying the amount due from such person and send it to the Collector of the district in which such person owns any property or resides or carries on his business and the said Collector on receipt of such certificate shall proceed to recover from the said person the amount specified thereunder as if it were an arrear of land revenue; that the recovery, if any, has to be effected under the Revenue Act but not under the execution proceedings, and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 4. The impugned order is issued under Order XXI Rule 54 C.P.C. restraining the petitioner/judgment debtor from transferring or creating a charge over the property specified in the schedule by sale, gift or otherwise. If the executing Court has no jurisdiction to pass such an order, the petitioner can as well file a petition to vacate the order issued under Order XXI Rule 54 C.P.C. The order is in pursuance of decree, dated 30.06.2003, passed in O.S.No.1330 of 1993. That judgment has become final. Though appeals are filed against the decree, no stay was granted. Therefore, the trial Court has got a jurisdiction to execute the decree. If the petitioner is really aggrieved on the point of jurisdiction, he can file an application before the trial Court. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order and the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 23rd August, 2011. AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3439 OF 2011 Date:23.08.2011 AMD