THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY C.R.P.No. 3893 of 2009 Date of Order: 15-07-2011 Between: Thota Krishna Murthy ..Petitioner and 1. Suddapalli Subba Lakshmi and others. ..Respondents The Court made the following Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY C.R.P.No.3893 of 2009 Oral order: The petitioner/decreeholder filed this revision petition to revise the orders of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, dt. 19-12-2006 passed in EA No.--/2006 in EP No.135/2006 in OS No.618/2003, whereunder the petition filed under Sec. 151 CPC to reopen the execution petition which was closed on 22-6-2006, was rejected. The petitioner, who is the plaintiff in OS No.618/2003, filed the suit OS No.618/2003 against the respondents 1 to 4 herein who are defendants in the suit, for recovery of the amount due under a promissory note executed by Suddapalli Venkata Bala Bhaskar Murthy, who is the husband and father of the respondents 1 to 4 respectively. Along with the suit, the plaintiff filed IA No.161/2005 under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC for attachment of Staff Benevolent –cum- Thrift Scheme amount to a tune of Rs.1 lakh. The trial court attached the said amount on 20-10-2003. On decreeing the suit, the plaintiff filed the above EP. In which, garnishee, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Machilipatnam Depot addressed a letter stating that the deceased Bhaskar Murthy worked as Conductor in APSRTC; though the attachment order was passed on 20-10-2003, it was made absolute on 19-12-2005; the amount lying under the scheme is not liable to be attached and they are unable to send the attached amount. The executing court closed the executing petition on 22-6-2006. To re-open the execution petition, the decree holder filed the present petition. The executing court rejected the reopen petition holding that the amount covered under Staff Benevolent Thrift Scheme cannot be attached as per orders passed by the High Court in CRP No.1458/1985. The rejection order passed by the executing court does not suffer from any manifest illegality warranting interference by this court. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. Dt.15-7-2011 kmr