AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
U.Durga Prasad Rao, J
This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner/JDR3 aggrieved by the order dated 31.07.2023 in E.P. No.28 of 2022 in ARC No.462/2014 on the file of learned V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, whereunder learned Judge allowed the E.P. and directed the salary of petitioner/JDR3 to be attached under Section 60 of CPC by issuing attachment warrant.
Heard Sri Ganta Rama Rao, learned Senior Counsel, representing on behalf of Sri Peeta Raman, learned counsel for petitioner on record and Sri Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, learned counsel representing on behalf of 1st respondent.
The grievance of the petitioner as ventilated by the learned counsel is that the petitioner/JDR3 having received notices under Order 21 Rule 48 of CPC in fact engaged a counsel Sri Harischandra Prasad but without granting time for counter and hearing parties, unfortunately Execution Court has, in the impugned order, mentioned as if JDR3 refused to receive Rule 48 notice and thereby, passed the impugned attachment order and therefore, principles of natural justice are violated. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner/JDR3 already filed E.A. No.96 of 2023 for raising the attachment and other reliefs and same is pending before the Execution Court. He thus submitted that the Execution Court may be directed to consider the said application and pass orders expeditiously as the salary of the petitioner/JDR3 is attached and he is put to much hardship.
Sri Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, learned counsel for 1st respondent opposed the petition.
Having found reasonability in the submission of learned counsel for petitioner, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Execution Court to consider E.A. No.96 of 2023 and after affording an opportunity of hearing to both parties, pass an order on merits expeditiously but not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such exercise is completed, the Execution Court shall not take any consequential steps pursuant to the order dated 31.08.2023 in E.P. No.28 of 2022 in ARC No.462 of 2014. No costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in this case shall stand closed.