AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R Raghunandan Rao, J
As both the revision petitions arise out of the same set of facts, they are disposed of by this common order.
Heard Smt. T.V. Sridevi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri T.D. Phani Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
The respondent herein had filed E.P.No.1 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, (Junior Division) Narsipatnam, Visakhapatnam District, for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,51,348/- along with interest, from the petitioner herein, on the basis of a decree obtained in O.S.No.226 of 2015.
The petitioner had not filed his counter affidavit despite number of adjournments being granted for filing of counter affidavit.
The Executing Court had, thereupon, forfeited the right of the petitioner to file a counter affidavit. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed E.A.No.17 of 2024 for setting aside the earlier order of forfeiture and to permit the petitioner to file his counter affidavit. This application came to be dismissed, on 09.01.2025.
It may also be noticed that the Executing Court, earlier while forfeiting the right of the petitioner to file a counter, had also issued a garnishee order in E.P.No.1 of 2023, attaching the salary of the petitioner for payment of the decretal amounts. The petitioner had also moved E.A.No.18 of 2024 for stay of garnishee order, pending the filing of counter.
The Executing Court rejected this application on the ground that the petitioner had lost his right to file counter in view of the orders of the Executing Court in E.A.No.17 of 2024.
The petitioner has now filed C.R.P.No.482 of 2025 to set aside the order in E.A.No.17 of 2024 and C.R.P.No.476 of 2025 is filed to set aside the order in E.A.No.18 of 2024.
Though, the order of the Executing Court in forfeiting the right of the petitioner to file a counter is well founded in view of the conduct of the petitioner, it is also necessary to ensure that every party is given an adequate opportunity to defend himself.
In the present case, the petitioner contends that he has a valid defense against the Execution Petition and that he would suffer grievous and irreparable injury unless he is permitted to set forth his case.
In the circumstances, these civil revision petitions are allowed with the following directions.
The orders in E.A.Nos.17 and 18 of 2024 are set aside and the petitioner is permitted to file his counter.
This order is subject to the condition of the petitioner filing his counter within one week from today.
Thereafter, the Executing Court shall decide E.A.No.18 of 2024 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.