KAREDLA SEETHARAMAIAH Vs. DURVASULA YAGNESWARA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is preferred aganist an order of the executing Court, overruling the objection raised by the revision-petitioner (judgment-debtor) to the effect that the decree is inexecutable in view of the Andhra Pradesh Act No.7 of 1977, and directing the expression to proceed

(2.) The suit O.S.411 of 1976, was instituted by the plaintiff-respon. dent, to recover a sum of Rs 2182-70 Ps. on the foot of a promissory note. The defendant remained ex parte and, accordingly the suit was decreed exparte.under the following Judgment: "Certificate of Village Karnam filed, which shows wet land Ac. 313 cents and dry Ac. 416 cents. The extent of land of the defendant shows that he is not a small farmer as defined under Ordinance 25 of 1976. Since the plaintiff has proved the case, the suit is decreed with costs as prayed for".

(3.) The plaintiff took out execution in E.P.No. 34/1977, wherein the judgment-debtor (revision petitioner)filed a counter contending that inasmuchas he is a 'small farmer' within the meaning of the aforesaid Andhra Pradesh Act, the debt has abated and that, the decree is inexecutable. An enquiry was held by the executing Court, wherein the decree-holder examined himself as F.W.I while the judgment debtor examined himself as R.W 1 besides examining another witness as R.W.2. The decree-holder also marked the copy of the judgment in the suit, and some other documents, as Exs.A-1 toA-3. The executing Court overruled the judgment debtor's objection, observing that the said plea is precluded by the finding recorded in the judgment in the suit. It directed the execution to proceed and the judgment debtor to be arrested and detained in civil prison.