GADE SUSILA Vs. KARANAM APPA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein was the judgment-debtor. The respondent here in was decree holder. The respondent herein had instituted Small Cause No.13 of 1997 in the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri,Guntur District for recovery of certain amount. The suit was decreed. Thereafter, the decree-holder riled E.P.No.68 of 1998 in S.C.13 of 1997 with a prayer to attach immovable property of the petitioner herein. The said petition was ordered. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision has been filed.

(2.) To-day the matter cam up for admission. It is seen that the decree was passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri who was exercising the power of Small Cause Court in a Small cause suit. Therefore, under Order 50 Rule 1(a)(ii) CPC, the Court exercising the powers under the small cause Courts Act and the Small Cause Court passing money decree can not put the immovable property to sale. Hence, this Court holds that the order passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge in E.P.68 of 1998 attaching the immovable property of the Judgment-debtor is held to be bad in law. Hence it is set-aside

(3.) The decree holder may apply in the same execution proceedings for attaching the movable property of Judgment -debtor. With this direction the Civil Revision Petition is allowed at the admission stage.