MUKKA RAMANNA Vs. SHAIK AFIB AHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is preferred against the order dated 26-09-2002 in E.A.No. 13 of 2002 in E.P.No. 115 of 2000 in O.P.No. 635 of 1997 in the file of the Court of II Additional District Judge, Warangal, dismissing the petition filed under Order 21 Rule 106 read with Section 151 C.P.C.

(2.) Respondent obtained an Award in O.P.No. 635 of 1997 against the revision petitioner and filed E.P.No. 115 of 2000 to execute the same by arresting the petitioner for realisation of the amount due under the Award. Since the petitioner did not appear, he was set ex parte and an order of arrest was passed, E.A.No. 13 of 2002 was filed by the petitioner to set aside the ex parte order of arrest passed against him, which was dismissed by the order under revision.

(3.) The contention of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner is that no notice was ever served on the petitioner in the E.P. and in fact the petitioner had filed I.P.No. 19 of 2002 to declare him a insolvent, and so he cannot be arrested, and, therefore, the Court ought to have allowed E.A.No. 13 of 2002 and should have given an opportunity to the petitioner to say what he has to in the E.P.