THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.R.P.No.3138 of 2010 ORDER: The respondent filed O.S.No.65 of 2005 in the Court of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, against the petitioner, for recovery of amount. The suit was decreed, and thereafter, E.P.No.86 of 2006 was filed, under Rules 37 and 38 of Order 21 C.P.C., with a prayer to arrest the petitioner herein and to detain him in civil prison. The Executing Court issued notices to the petitioner and the enquiry in the E.P. is in progress. PW.1 is said to have filed an affidavit in lieu of chief-examination. On the ground that the petitioner did not appear on 06.07.2010, the Executing Court directed his arrest for production of his undertaking enquiry, as to his means. The same is challenged in this revision. Normally, this Court would issue notice before any order of Executing Court is set aside. The one under challenge is a routine one and leading to any adjudication of final disposal. Whenever an application under Rules 37 and 38 of Order 21 C.P.C., is filed, the enquiry, as to the means possessed by the judgment debtor, is to be held in his presence. The Executing Court is conferred with the power to cause arrest of the judgment debtor for being procured to the Court even for enquiry. Obviously, it is in this context that the Executing Court passed the order under revision. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not only appeared in response to the notice in the E.P., but also engaged an advocate. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the C.R.P. is allowed and the order under revision is set aside, on condition that the petitioner shall appear before the Executing Court on the next date of hearing. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dated:23.07.2010 Note: Furnish C.C. in three days. (B/o) GJ