THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3678 OF 2009 Dated 16th July, 2010 Between: Regati Eswar Reddy …Petitioner And Y.Rami Reddy …Respondent Counsel for the petitioner : Sri G.Rama Sarma Counsel for the respondents: Sri T.Kumar Babu The Court made the following ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed against order dated 22.06.2009 in E.A.No.195 of 2009 in E.P.No.238 of 2007 in O.S.No.89 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal, Kurnool District. The petitioner is the decree holder in the abovementioned suit. The respondent is the judgment debtor. The petitioner filed E.P. No.238 of 2007 for execution of the decree for recovery of money. An ex parte order was passed on 26.10.2007, ordering sale of the property of the respondent-judgment debtor. Evidently the sale held in pursuance thereof was confirmed by the Court below on 20.10.2008. The petitioner pleaded that physical possession of the property was delivered to him. The respondent has filed an application for setting aside ex parte order dated 26.10.2007. The petitioner herein filed a counter-affidavit, wherein a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the said application was raised. On consideration of the preliminary objection, the Court below overruled the same and sought to proceed with the adjudication of the application on merits by the impugned order. After hearing Sri G.Rama Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri T.Kumar Babu, learned counsel for the respondent, I am of the opinion that the order passed by the Court below entertaining the application does not call for interference at this stage. By the impugned order, the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal has merely entertained the application for adjudication. The petitioner is entitled to raise all legally permissible grounds including the maintainability of the application on various grounds and the Court below has to consider all those contentions and pass a comprehensive order while disposing of the E.A filed by the respondent. Therefore, I do not find this a fit case for interference at this stage. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal, Kurnool District, shall make an endeavour to dispose of E.A.No.195 of 2009 filed by the respondent as expeditiously as possible. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, CRPMP No.5093 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 16th July, 2010 vrn