D.V.PRASAD Vs. B.MURALI KRISHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is on account of persons like the petitioner, that the people are losing faith in the judicial system and they are even preferring the anti-social elements to recover the amounts, than approaching the Courts.

(2.) The 1st respondent filed O.S.No.813 of 1997 in the Court of the IV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, against the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 and 3, for recovery of amount, referable to trade between them. The suit was decreed on 28.04.2004. Aggrieved by that, petitioner filed CCCA No.191 of 2004 before this Court. An order of interim stay of execution of the decree was passed on condition that the petitioner shall deposit 50% of the decreetal amount within the stipulated time. The condition was not complied with, and thereby, the stay stood vacated.

(3.) Even while CCCA No.191 of 2004 was pending, the petitioner filed O.S.No.167 of 2005 in the Court of the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, with a prayer to set aside the decree in O.S.No.813 of 1997, on the ground that it was obtained by playing fraud. That suit was dismissed on 04.07.2006. CCCA No.268 of 2006 filed against the same is pending before this Court. There again, an order of stay of execution of the decree in O.S.No.813 of 1997 was passed on condition that the petitioner shall deposit half of the decreetal amount. The petitioner did not comply with the condition and the interim order ceased to be in force.