THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1851 of 2010 DT.12.8.2011 Between: Guntupalli Parasuvedeswara Rao … Petitioner And UCO Bank (United Commercial Bank) Rep by its Branch Manager, Guntur … Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri J.Praphakar Counsel for respondent: Sri The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1851 of 2010 O R D E R: This revision is filed against the order dated 30-7-2009, made in E.A.427 of 2005 in E.P.No.59 of 2004 in O.S.No.57 of 1978, on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 29 of the Code of Civil Procedure to grant stay of all further proceedings in E.P.No.59 of 2004 in O.S.No.205 of 1984, on the file of Subordinate Judge, Addanki till the disposal of A.S.No.372 of 1993 filed before this Court against the judgment in O.S.No.205 of 1982. It is the case of the petitioner that the suit filed by the respondent-Bank in O.S.No.57 of 1978 was decreed, against which, the petitioner herein filed A.S.No.2587 of 1987. It is stated that the petitioner also filed suit O.S.No.205 of 1982 against the Bank, which was also decreed, against which, the bank filed A.S.No.372 of 1993 before this Court. Both the appeal suits A.S.No.2587 of 1987 and A.S.No.372 of 1993 were heard and disposed off by this Court by a common Judgment dated 11-9-1997 and the Judgment in O.S.No.57 of 1978 filed by the Bank was confirmed with some modifications. Insofar as A.S.No.372 of 1993 is concerned, it is stated that the Judgment was recalled and the appeal suit is pending still on the file of this Court. That being so, in the absence of any stay granted by any other Court disentitling the decree holder to execute the decree in O.S.No.57 of 1978, the petitioner cannot seek stay of all further proceedings in the suit filed by the Bank. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the Court below rightly observed that the petitioner is not entitled for stay of all further proceedings in the suit and the petitioner ought to have moved an application before this Court to obtain stay in the pending appeal in A.S.No.372 of 1993. In the circumstances, I do not see any infirmity to interfere with the impugned order. Revision is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 12.8.2011 grk THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1851 of 2010 DATE: 12.8.2011