Scribd
Upload
110 views2 pages

Legal Order on Execution Petition

The court delivered an order allowing the petitioner's execution petition without costs. The petitioner, a farmer, had successfully filed the execution petition within the 12-year limitation period to realize the decretal amount and seek sale of scheduled properties. The court found that the petitioner had come to the court with clean hands and established their case against the judgment debtor. It issued notices under Order 21 Rule 43 to the judgment debtor and ordered attachment of the scheduled movable properties upon payment of process fees. The matter was listed for further hearing on February 27th, 2020. No oral or documentary evidence was produced by either side.

Uploaded by

CHIRANJEEVI PONNAGANTI
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
110 views2 pages

Legal Order on Execution Petition

The court delivered an order allowing the petitioner's execution petition without costs. The petitioner, a farmer, had successfully filed the execution petition within the 12-year limitation period to realize the decretal amount and seek sale of scheduled properties. The court found that the petitioner had come to the court with clean hands and established their case against the judgment debtor. It issued notices under Order 21 Rule 43 to the judgment debtor and ordered attachment of the scheduled movable properties upon payment of process fees. The matter was listed for further hearing on February 27th, 2020. No oral or documentary evidence was produced by either side.

Uploaded by

CHIRANJEEVI PONNAGANTI
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

1

IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE :: ELURU

PRESENT: - Sri Y.Bennayya Naidu,


Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Eluru

Wednesday, this the 29th day of January, 2020

E.P.No.82/2018 in LAOP No.102/1991

Between:-

Garlapati Sambaiah, S/o.Hanumantha Rao, Hindu, Male, 57 years, Cultivation,


r/o.Yepuru, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District. … Petitioner/D.Hr./5 th Claimant.
and
L.A.O. (RDO), Eluru, West Godavari District. ... Respondent/J.Dr.
This petition coming before me for final hearing on 20.01.2020 in the presence of
Sri G.V.Nageswara Rao, Advocate for the petitioner/D.Hr and of Sri K.Ch.N.Jagan
Mohan, Government Pleader representing the State i.e., respondent; and upon hearing
and upon perusing the material available on record, this Court delivered the following :

ORDER

1. This is a petition filed by the Petitioner under Order 21, Rule 22 and Rule

43 and 64 to 66 of CPC for realization of the decretal amount of DHr and on sale of

petition schedule properties.

2. On consideration of plea of the petitioner/DHr and on scrutiny of contents

of the decree passed by the Court and on perusal of affidavit and petition, I am of the

opinion that the petitioner/DHr came to the Court with clean hands and the

petitioner/DHr has successfully established that he filed the execution of petition before

the Court within the period of limitation of 12 years from the date of passing of decree

and he came to the Court with clean hands within period of limitation and also EP filed

by him is not barred by limitation and he filed this petition within the period of limitation

for seeking relief against the JDr.

3. On scrutiny of plea of the petitioner and recitals of the petition and affidavit

and contents of the decree and on perusal of the contents of the counter, I am of the

opinion that the petitioner has come to the Court with clean hands and the petitioner has

successfully established his case and allegations against JDr. Further I hold that the
2

petitioner has successfully filed the execution petition before the Court within the period

of limitation of 12 years and the petitioner approached to the Court with clean hands by

way of filing this petition within the statutory period of 12 years. Further, I found that the

petition filed by the petitioner i.e., E.P filed by the petitioner is not barred by limitation

and the period of limitation of 12 years is not completed. Further the petition filed by the

petitioner is absolutely within the period of limitation. So the petitioner has filed this

petition as per law within the period of limitation of 12 years and E.P is not barred by

limitation. Therefore, the petitioner/DHr is entitled to proceed against the JDr and he is

entitled to continue the execution of proceedings against the JDr as per law.

4. Hence, in the result, the petition under Order 21 Rule 22 is allowed

without costs. Issue Or.21, Rule 43 notice to the J.Dr., and as well as issue an order of

attachment over the petition schedule movable properties on payment of process. Call

on 27.02.2020.

Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by me in


the open Court this 29th day of January, 2020.

PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,


ELURU.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

No oral or documentary evidence is adduced on either side.

PSCJ
Eluru.

You might also like