KADALI CHINA SATYANARAYANA Vs. TATAVARTHI VISWANADHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment debtors in EP.No. 10 of 1999 in OS.No. 13 of 1992 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Razole filed this revision petition against the order-dated 25.8.1999 passed by the Executing Court in the said EP.

(2.) Necessary facts for the disposal of this revision petition are as follows:

(3.) It is contended on behalf of the revision petitioners that when once the Executing Court posted the EP for enquiry, it should not have refused to permit the judgment debtors to adduce evidence in support of the contentions raised by the judgment debtors in the counter. Normally, the Executing Court shall give an opportunity to the judgment debtors to adduce evidence. In the circumstances of the present case, I do not find any substance in the contentions advanced on behalf of the revision petitioners to set aside the impugned order passed by the trial Court. I am not concerned now with the reasons given by the Executing Court for not permitting the judgment debtors to adduce evidence.