MOHD KHADEER Vs. K VENKATESHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these Revision Petitions arising out of the execution proceedings in O.S.No. 655 of 1989 on the file of the Court of the IX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, are heard together and decided by this common order.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. As could be seen from the material available on record, O.S.No. 655 of 1989 which was filed for recovery of money was decreed as prayed for. In pursuance thereof the decree -holders filed E.P.N0.8 of 2013 for execution of the decree by attachment and sale of the E.P. schedule properties. Several claim petitions came to be filed under Order XXI Rule 58 of C.P.C. claiming title and possession to the E.P. schedule property. The said claim petitions were contested by the decree holders contending inter alia that the possession of the E.P. schedule property was already delivered to them by the bailiff. While so, the claim petitioners filed applications with a prayer to summon the Court bailiff for cross -examination by them with regard to the interim reports dated 24 -3 -2011 and 22 -11 -2012 as well as the final report dated 26 -11 -2012 filed by the bailiff. It was alleged by the claim petitioners that the Court bailiff prepared the interim reports and final report in collusion with the decree -holders and in fact the possession of the schedule property was never delivered to the decree -holders and that the same continues to be in possession of the claim petitioners. The said allegations were denied by the decree -holders and it was contended that the petitions were filed with false and baseless allegations only to delay the disposal of the claim petitions.

(3.) THESE Revision Petitions are filed by the decree -holders against the above said orders passed in E.A.Nos. 106,104,154,108, 109, 105 and 38 of 2013 respectively.