THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5018 OF 2009 Dated:31.12.2009 Between: M/s.Shriram Chits Private Ltd. …Petitioner and Smt.Gundumali Manjulabai, And others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5018 OF 2009 ORDER: The petitioner obtained decree in O.S.No.840 of 2005 against the respondents for payment of money. The decree was passed by the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kovvur on 23.06.2007. The petitioner then presented E.P. (SR) No.4456 of 2009 to the Court at Kovvur. In the meanwhile, with effect from 29.11.2008, the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Jangareddigudem was constituted, for this reason Kovvur Court returned the E.P., on the ground that it has no jurisdiction. E.P., was then presented to the Court at Jangareddigudem. The same being E.P. (SR) No.370 of 2009 was returned by the said Court on 30.09.2009, observing as under. Heard the learned counsel his petitioners and perused the record. This execution petition filed by the General Power of Attorney holder rep. by its Divisional Manager on behalf of the D.Hr., Chits (P) Ltd., the petitioner filed promissory petition under Rule 32 of Civil Rules of Practice permit him to file this Execution Petition on behalf Shriram Chits Private Ltd. The petitioner also filed another affidavit praying the Hon’ble Court to transmitting the decree to this Hon’ble Court along with non-satisfactory certificate. But this Court has no jurisdiction to order the transmitting the decree as prayed by the petitioner. The petitioner also filed another affidavit and petition to attach the salaries of the J.Dr No.1 and 2. According to the decree copy filed by the D.Hr/Petitioner the decree in O.S.No.840/2005 was decreed by the Hon’ble Principal Junior Civil Judges Court, Kovvur on 23.06.2008. This Court was established on 29.11.2008 prior to formation of this Court the decree was passed and without transmitting the decree from the Hon’ble Principal Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Kovvur. This Court was no jurisdiction to number, this Execution Petition. Hence, this petition is returned to the petitioner to comply the office objections. Though notice is served on respondents, none appears for them. In this civil revision petition, counsel for petitioner relies on Section 37 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and a Judgment of this Court in Pasala Suryachandra Rao v Vatti Venkata Ranga Pardhasaradhi[1] and submits that in view of the explanation to Section 37 of CPC, the Court which passed the decree and the Court to whose jurisdiction the area has been transferred, can entertain the E.P. After perusing the relevant provision and precedent, this Court is compelled to countenance the submission of counsel for petitioner. 37. Definition of Court which passed a decree.- The expression “Court which passed a decree”, or words to that effect, shall, in relation to the execution of decrees, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context, be deemed to include,- (a) where the decree to be executed has been passed in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction, the Court of first instance, and (b) where the Court of first instance has ceased to exist or to have jurisdiction to execute it, the Court which, if the suit wherein the decree was passed was instituted at the time of making the application for the execution of the decree, would have jurisdiction to try such suit. Explanation.- The Court of first instance does not cease to have jurisdiction to execute a decree merely on the ground that after the institution of the suit wherein the decree was passed or after the passing of the decree, any area has been transferred from the jurisdiction of that Court to the jurisdiction of any other Court; but, in every such case, such other Court shall also have jurisdiction to execute the decree, if at the time of making the application for execution of the decree it would have jurisdiction to try the said suit. (emphasis supplied) A plain reading of explanation leaves no doubt that the Court which passed the decree does not cease to have jurisdiction even the area within its territory has been transferred to another Court. Secondly, the Court then either existing or newly created to which earlier area has been transferred also has jurisdiction as if the same Court had passed the decree. To the same effect, it is the ratio of this Court in Pasala Suryachandra Rao (supra). In the result, the civil revision petition is allowed and the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Jangareddigudem is directed to register the E.P. (SR) No.370 of 2009 and proceed with the matter in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 31.12.2009 pln [1] 1999 (2) ALT 88