SANDUPATLA VENU MADHAV Vs. NALLAMEKALA RAGHAVULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed OS No.76 of 2001 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Nakrekal, against the 3rd respondent herein, for recovery of some amounts. He also filed IA.No.255 of 2001 under Order XXXVffl Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) for attachment of the properties of the 3rd respondent before judgment. During the consideration of that IA, Respondents 1 and 2 offered themselves as sureties. Therefore, the attachment was not proceeded with. The suit was ultimately decreed on 3-10-2002.

(2.) Since the 3rd respondent did not satisfy the decree, the petitioner filed EP.No.8 of 2003. Along with the 3rd respondent, he impleaded Respondents 1 and 2 in the EP. They, in turn, filed EA.No.27 of 2003 under Order XXI Rules 54, 64 and 66 of CPC, requesting the Executing Court to proceed against the judgment-debtor and his properties. It was their case that as long as the property which was sought to be attached under Order XXXVIII is in tact they cannot be proceeded with. The Executing Court allowed the IA through its order dated 24-10-2003. Hence, this Revision Petition.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that Respondents 1 and 2 have undertaken to discharge the liability of the 3rd respondent under the decree, when they offered themselves as sureties in the IA filed under Order XXXVIII Rule 1 CPC. He submits that it is always open for the Decree Holder to proceed against the judgment-debtor or the sureties.