THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.2317 of 2011 Date:24th June, 2011 Between: Syed Sabjar Basha @ Sikindar ..... Petitioner AND Gundlapalli Sivaiah .....Respondent *** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.2317 of 2011 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 31.05.2011, passed in E.A.No.72 of 2008 in E.P.No.21 of 2007 in O.S.No.21 of 2005 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Rayachoty, whereby and whereunder, the learned Senior Civil Judge ordered for delivery of the possession of E.P. schedule property to the decree holder. 2. The respondent herein filed the suit for specific performance and obtained a decree. Thereafter, he filed E.P.No.21 of 2007. He moved E.A.No.72 of 2008 under Order 21, Rule 35 CPC seeking a direction to the judgment-debtor to deliver possession of the property. The judgment- debtor entered appearance and resisted the application. On behalf of the decree-holder, he got himself examined as PW.1 and on behalf of the judgment-debtor, he got himself examined as RW.1, besides examining one M.Kanaka Brahmachary as RW.2. The executing Court, on considering the material brought on record and on hearing the counsel appearing for the parties, proceeded to over-rule the objections put on record by the petitioner herein and directed the judgment-debtor to put the decree-holder in possession of the property, by order, dated 31.05.2011. The said order is assailed in this revision. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/judgment debtor and perused the order impugned in this revision. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/judgment debtor submits that the petitioner has not executed any document in favour of the respondent/decree-holder and therefore, the decree obtained by the respondent/decree-holder does not bind him and since, he is the owner of the property, he cannot be dispossessed without obtaining a decree against him. 5. I have gone through the order impugned in this revision. The petitioner filed a claim petition. The said claim petition came to be dismissed. When once the claim petition is dismissed, he cannot be permitted to raise the objection that he is the owner of the property and therefore, the decree-holder is not entitled for possession. The executing Court considered the material brought on record in right perspective and proceeded to dismiss the application filed by the petitioner/judgment- debtor. I do not see any illegality or irregularity warranting interference of this Court in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed at the admission stage. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:24th June, 2011. cs THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.2317 of 2011 Date:24th June, 2011