Orchu Srinivasarao v. Devireddy Srinivasa Reddy,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY THE THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND SIXTEEN PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 827 of 2016 Between:

Orchu Srinivasa Rao ... Petitioner Vs.

Devireddy Srinivasa Reddy ... Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri T.Ramakoteswara Rao Counsel for the Respondent: Sri G.V.S. Mehar Kumar

The Court made the following: [order follows] HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 827 OF 2016 COMMON ORDER :

Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks direction to stay all further proceedings in EP.No. 110 of 2013 in OS.No. 327 of 2006 pending before the Principal Senior Civil Judge's Court, Guntur, pending disposal of Civil Revision Petition.

2. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits that pursuant to order dated 19/2/2016 the petitioner has already deposited 50% of the E.P. amount i.e., decretal amount to the credit of the suit in the lower court. He further submits that since the order of decree dated 04/12/2015 has not been challenged by the petitioner, therefore, the decree has attained finality. It is made clear that CRP.No.827 of 2016 which is pending before this Court is against the arrest of the petitioner in EP.No. 110 of 2013.

3. Now the petitioner seeks extension of time for a period

of six months to deposit balance amount as per decree.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/decree holder opposed the petition and contends that extension of time may be granted only for two months.

5. Keeping in view the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that justice would be met if the petitioner is granted six months time from today. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Consequently CRP.No. 827 of 2016 stands withdrawn. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to deposit the balance decretal amount then the trial court is at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in EP.No.110 of 2013 in accordance with law. The trial court is further directed to release the amount deposited by the petitioner in favour of the respondent/decree holder without furnishing any security on taking steps by him.

6. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions if any, pending in the Civil Revision Petition shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

​ ____________________________ JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT.

03/06/2016

I s L HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 827 OF 2016

Date: 03/06/2016 Circulation No.

Court Master: I s L