APHC010230632022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL REVISION PETITION Between: Yellapu Varaha Venkata Siva Satyanarayana @ Bobby,varaha Venkata Siva Satyanaryana @ Bobbyy Silaparasetty Veera Venkata Satyanaraya Srinu Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P RAJASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent: 1. The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 932 OF 2022 Yellapu Varaha Venkata Siva Satyanarayana @ Bobby,varaha Venkata Siva Satyanaryana @ Bobbyy AND Silaparasetty Veera Venkata Satyanaraya Srinu ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: the Respondent: The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3460] FRIDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 2022 Yellapu Varaha Venkata Siva Satyanarayana @ Bobby,varaha ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 932 OF 2022 ORDER:- The present Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 21.04.2022 in E.P.No.25 of 2019 in O.S.No.132 of 2013 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalli. 2. The petitioner is the judgment debtor. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of promissory note amount. The said suit was decreed on 06.12.2016. As the amount was not paid, E.P. was filed seeking arrest of the petitioner under order 21, rue 37 of C.P.C. The trial Court, after enquiry, found that the petitioner was having sufficient means. Hence, allowed the E.P. Questioning the same, the present C.R.P is filed. 3. This Court passed an interim order on 05.05.2022, as follows: I.A.No.1 of 2022 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Considering the submissions made and perusing the material on, there shall be interim stay as prayed for, subject to the condition of the petitioner depositing 1/4th of the decretal amount including the costs and interest to the credit of the suit, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order” 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the interim order has been complied with. 5. The trial Court had passed a detailed order establishing the means even though the enquiry is of a summary nature. In the enquiry PW-1 was examined and Ex.P1 to P4 were marked in evidence. No evidence was let in by the petitioner. The trial court after considering the oral and documentary evidence came to a conclusion that the petitioner was doing business and has sufficient means. This being a fact finding aspect, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order of the trial Court on the aspect of the means of the petitioner. Further, there is no explanation from the petitioner as what he has done with the suit amount taken from the plaintiff. The Court would not be in a position to presume that the said amount is expended until the Judgment Debtor say so. 6. In view of the conditional order passed by this Court having been complied, the ends of justice would be met, if the petitioner is granted nine (9) months time from today to pay the balance amount to the full satisfaction of the E.P. In default, the trial Court can proceed with the order dated 21.04.2022 for arrest of petitioner without further reference to this Court. 7. With the above directions and observations, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, the interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand dismissed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY,J Date: 31.01.2025 KK THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 932 OF 2022 31.01.2025 KK