KASTURIBAI Vs. BADEMIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This isa petition under Section 115 C.P.C. to revise the order of the learned District Munsif in E.P. No. 69/78 in O.S, 543/72 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif, Nandigama, dismissing the execution petition for recovery of the decretal amount by way of arrest of the Judgment debtor, the respondent herein, on two grounds viz., that the Judgmentdebtor-respondent had no means to discharge the decretal amount and secondly on the ground that the Judgment-debtor is entitled to the benefits of the A.P. Agricultural Indebtedness (Relief) Act (Act No. 7 of 1977).

(2.) The relevant facts leading to the revision petition are as follows: The Petitioner here in obtained a money-decree against the respondent in O.S. No. 543/72, and filed an execution petition for the execution of the decree by way of arrest and detention in civil prison of the respondent on the ground that the respondent was doing business, getting an annual income of Rs. 10000/- and was having capacity to discharge the decree debt. The respondent filed a counter stating that he had no capacity or means to pay the decree amount, that he was not possessed of any property or doing any business and that he was eking out his livelihood by working as an agricultural cooly and that he had no other source of income and that he was entitled to the benefits of A.P. Act 7 of 1977 being an agricultural labourer and therefore the decree debt should be deemed to have been discharged under Section 4 of the said Act.

(3.) In order to prove that the respondent was running a fruit shop as well as a vegetable shop in the village, the petitioner examined her husband as P.W. 1, two residents of Jaggayyapet as P Ws. 2 and 3, the Special Officer of Jaggayyapet Gram Panchayat who is alleged to have granted the licence to the respondent for selling fruits in Jaggayyapet Panchayat area as P.W. 4, the Sanitary Inspector of Jaggayyapet as P.W. 5 and a Police constable of Jaggayyapet as P.W. 6 to show that a case was filed against the respondent for causing obstruction to the traffic with his fruit cart, The respondent examined himself as R.W. 1 and filed Ex B-1 an agreement of sale in favour of his wife in respect of some agricultural land.