THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.5379 OF 2007 DT.01.07.2010 Between: Sagiraju Venkata Srinivasa Raju ……….Petitioner Vs. Keesara Murali Krishna ……………….Respondent O R D E R: The petitioner who is the judgment debtor seeks to assail the execution laid down by the respondent in E.P.No.9 of 2006, dated 29.10.2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Suryapet, in pursuance of a decree obtained by him in O.S.No.51 of 2002 for recovery of the amount due. The main ground urged on behalf of the petitioner is that pursuant to the decree passed by the trial court in O.S.No.51 of 2002, the petitioner filed an appeal before the II Additional District Judge, Nalgonda District, which is yet to be numbered and therefore, there could not have been any execution at this juncture. He further submits that since substantial amount has already been paid in terms of the orders of this court, dated 09.03.2010, there need not be any further deposit. Having heard the learned counsel and perusing the material, I am not inclined to accept the version of the learned counsel for the petitioner for the reason that mere pendency of an appeal would entitle the judgment debtor to stall the liability. Hence, I do not find any merit in the revision petition. The revision petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is given six weeks time for depositing the balance amount. On such deposit by the petitioner in terms of the interim orders of this court, dated 30.11.2007, the respondent is permitted to withdraw the amount without furnishing any security. No order as to costs. ________________ B.PRAKASH RAO J., Dt.01.07.2010 tjs