THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3224 of 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 C.P.C questioning the order dated 07.04.2009 passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri, Guntur District in E.P.No.76 of 2006 in O.S.No.140 of 2002. Heard both sides and at their request the main revision itself is taken up for disposal. The brief facts, which admittedly speak out from the chequered events are that pursuant to the decree obtained in the above suit, the respondent/decree holder filed the above Execution Petition under Order XXI Rules 54, 66 and 64 C.P.C to attach the schedule property and to sell the same in the court auction for realisation of the decretal amount. The main objection raised by the petitioners/judgment debtors was that the EP schedule property was assigned property and the same was given by the Government to the deceased first judgment debtor under Ex.B.1-patta, and therefore, it cannot be attached or sold in execution of the decree. However, on the said objection, a finding has been given by the Court below. Further, the EP schedule property was mortgaged previously to one K.Bavaiah, who filed a suit for recovery of the mortgage debt, and when the same was brought to sale in that suit, the judgment debtors discharged the mortgage and got released the said mortgaged property. Considering the submissions made and also on perusing the entire material available on record, particularly, the evidence of R.W.1 and Ex.B.1, which were discussed at para 10 of the impugned order, the Court below held that if the EP schedule property is assigned land, the judgment debtors ought to have taken the said defence previously and objected for sale of the said property in the proceedings lodged by K.Bavaiah, and accordingly overruled the objections raised by the judgment debtors. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition. The learned counsel for the respondent/decree holder submits that the EP schedule property was put to sale subsequently also. Apart from such mortgage or sale by the Court, the fact remains that if the properties are assigned lands, necessarily, consequences of such assignments and the effect thereof has to be considered. It is well settled that the assigned lands cannot be meddled with, as normally would fall in respect of private properties. Since this aspect has not been considered by the Court below, with a view to give further opportunity to both sides and canvass the said plea on proper perspective, I am of the opinion that it would be appropriate to remand the matter to the Court below. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. Consequently, the order dated 07.04.2009 passed in E.P.No.76 of 2006 in O.S.No.140 of 2002 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Court below. The Court below is directed to dispose of the matter afresh, after giving notice and opportunity to both sides. No costs. B.PRAKASH RAO, J Date: 05.02.2010 va