VEERAGANDAM VENKATESWARLU Vs. NERELLA VEERASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It was not without reason that an adage got currency to the effect that the troubles of a plaintiff in a suit start after the decree is passed in his favour.

(2.) The petitioner filed O.S.No.397 of 1996 in the Court of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ongole against the respondent for recovery of amount, on the basis of a promissory note. The suit was decreed long back and after the decree became final, the petitioner filed E.P.No.315 of 2003 for execution of the decree, dated 17.01.1997. The respondent held shares in M/s.NFC. An order of attachment was passed on 03.03.2006 and the attachment was made absolute on 26.02.2007. The petitioner filed E.A.No.1407 of 2007 with a prayer to send for about 2000 shares of NFC for being sold for recovery of the suit amount. At one stage, the trial Court passed an order directing the garnishee to sell the shares.

(3.) On 07.02.2008, the garnishee addressed a letter stating that the share certificates are with the respondent and unless they are deposited, the sale cannot be effected. In view of this development, the petitioner filed E.A.No.738 of 2008 with a prayer to direct the respondent to produce the attached share certificates. The application was opposed by the respondent by raising some technical grounds. The executing Court dismissed E.A.No.738 of 2008 as infructuous, in view of the orders passed in E.A.No.1407 of 2007. The petitioner challenges the said order.