E N SATYANARAYANA Vs. CHOWDAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 23. 7. 2008 made in E. P. No. 129 of 2006 in O. S. No. 9 of 2004 on the file of the Court of Junior judge, Hindupur directing arrest of the revision petitioner in execution of the decree dated 2. 3. 2006 in O. S. No. 9 of 2004

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are as under: the respondent herein filed O. S. No. 9 of 2004 on the file of the Court of Junior Civil judge, Hindupur for recovery of Rs. 45,000/-allegedly due from the defendant/revision petitioner. The said suit was decreed by judgment dated 2. 3. 2006 as prayed for. Pursuant to said decree, the respondent/ decree Holder filed E. P. No. 129 of 2006 under Order XXI Rule 38 of the Code of civil Procedure, 1908 for arrest of the revision petitioner/judgment-debtor, alleging that he was evading the payment of the decretal amount. In support of the said allegations she got herself examined as PW1 and two more witnesses were examined as pws. 2 and 3. The extract of the Certificate of Registration of a Car was also marked as Ex. P1 to substantiate the plea that the judgment-debtor owned a Maruti Car and that he had sufficient means to pay the decretal amount. The judgment-debtor/ revision petitioner got himself examined as rw1.

(3.) ON appreciation of the said evidence, the Court below allowed the execution petition and ordered arrest of the judgment-debtor. The said order dated 23. 7. 2008 is under challenge in this civil revision petition contending inter alia that decree holder ought to have sought for recovery of the decretal amount by proceeding against the landed property in respect of which an order of attachment before judgment was in operation during the pendency of the suit.