THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.727 of 2011 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 CPC was filed by the judgment debtors in O.S.No.743 of 1975, aggrieved by order, dated 28.01.2011 passed in E.A.No.142 of 2009. The respondents/decree holders filed E.A.No.142 of 2009 seeking to appoint an Advocate Receiver to come with the Court amin for executing delivery warrant with the assistance of police. The said E.A. was allowed by the trial Court by order, dated 28.01.2011. In this Civil Revision Petition, it is the case of the petitioners/judgment debtors that there is no valid reason for appointing the Advocate Receiver. It is stated that the E.P. was filed against the property, which was not covered by the decree. The said pleas were negatived in the appeal filed by the petitioners against the judgment and decree of the trial Court in O.S.No.743 of 1975. In this case, it is to be noticed that the suit is of 1975 and was decreed in 1981 and the second appeal was also dismissed in 1987. The trial Court has taken into account the hurdles created by the judgment debtors and correctly allowed the E.A. It is also to be taken note of that the impugned order was passed as early as on 28.01.2011 appointing the Advocate Receiver to aid the Court Amin for delivery of warrant. In view of the reasons recorded by the trial Court, I do not find any illegality, which warrants interference in the impugned order under Section 115 CPC. The Civil Revision Petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 7th JUNE, 2011. kvni