GUNA YERRANNAIDU Vs. GUNA VENKANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the judgment debtor in E.P. No. 15 of 1997 in O.S. No. 54 of 1990 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Pathapatnam, Srikakulam District. The execution petition was filed by the respondent-decree holder for realisation of the decretal amount by ordering arrest of the judgment debtor. The Court below after recording the evidence of the decree-holder, as P.W. 1 and also the judgment debtor as RW-1 and other two witnesses as RWs. 2 and 3, had arrived at the conclusion that the judgment debtor is having means to pay the decree debt and accordingly ordered issuance of an arrest warrant and the judgment debtor aggrieved by the same had filed the present civil revision petition.

(2.) Sri A. Rama Rao, learned counsel representing the revision petitioner-judgment debtor had contended that the decretal debt, itself, has been discharged and to establish the same RWs. 2 and 3 were examined. But, no doubt, the evidence of RW-2 had been eschewed since he could not be offered for cross-examination as the said witness became an unwilling horse subsequently. The learned counsel had also taken me through a portion of the order of the Court below and had contended that even the appreciation of the evidence by the Court below is totally erroneous. At any rate, alternatively, the learned counsel requested for granting instalments for discharging the decree debt. The learned counsel had placed reliance on a decision of the Orissa High Court in Nrusingha Charan Baisakh v. SBI, Dhenkanal, AIR 1988 Orissa 132.

(3.) Sri Raj Kumar representing Mr. Ch. Dnanjaya, learned counsel for the respondent/decree holder had submitted that the contention that the decretal debt was discharged by the judgment debtor is totally unsustainable and the very fact that the judgment debtor had made an application- E.A. No. 11 of 1999 requesting time and also praying for grant of instalments for payment of the decretal debt, clearly goes to show that the stand taken by the judgment debtor is totally unsustainable one. Further the learned counsel also had pointed out the relevant portion of the order where a clear finding has been recorded relating to the means of the judgment debtor.