D SUNEETHA DEVI Vs. PUTTA RAMANAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN a decree for money obtained by her, revision-petitioner filed an E. P. seeking arrest of the respondent/judgment Debtor. Respondent filed his counter contending that except the salary being received by him, he has no other source of income and so he cannot be arrested. In support of her case, revision-petitioner examined herself as P. W. 1 and the respondent examined himself as R. W. 1 No documentary evidence was adduced by both the parties. The executing Court, after considering the evidence on record, directed the respondent to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month on or before 3rd of every succeeding month and directed his arrest in the event of the respondent's failure to pay the installments. Hence, this revision by the decree holder.

(2.) THE contention of the learned counsel for revision-petitioner is that since executing Court has no power to grant installments, the order under revision is unsustainable.

(3.) THOUGH served respondent did not put in his appearance.