IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 383 OF 2025 Petition under Section 115 of CPC, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to allow the Civil Revision Petition by setting aside the order dated 15/11/2024 in E.P. No. 36 of 2023 in O.S. No.70 of 2018 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge(Junior Division), Addanki, and consequently allow the E.P. No. 36 of 2023. Between: Paleru Ramanjaneyulu, S/o. Veeraswamy, Aged about 58 years, Ocjc Business, R/o. Panchayat Centre, Pamidipadu Village, Korisapadu Mandal, Addanki DMC, Bapatia District. ...Petitioner/Judgment Debtor/Defendant AND Mamillapalli Singaiah, S/o. Narayana, Aged about 52 years, Occ; Agriculture, R/o. Pamidipadu village, Korisapadu Mandal, Addanki DMC, Bapatia District. ...Respondent/Decree Holder/Plaintiff lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be A i / r pleased to stay of all further proceedings in E.P. No. 36 of 2023 in O.S. No.70 of 2018 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Addanki, pending the Civil Revision Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI Counsel for the Respondent: SRI INAKOLLU VENKATESWARLU The Court made the following: r THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.383 of 2025 ORDER: The respondent herein who is plaintiff filed suit against the revision petitioner who is defendant in suit O.S. No: 70 of 2018 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge Court Addanki for recovery of money basing on the promissory note and the suit was decreed vide judgement and decree dated 30.08.2018. The respondent who is the decree holder herein filed E.P. No: 36 of 2023 under Order 21 Rule 66 and 64 CPC for sale of the property in public auction in execution of the decree and the said execution petition was allowed vide order dated 15.11.2024 and execution court directed the respondent herein to produce the valuation certificate. Assailing the order dated 15.11.2024 in E.P. No: 36 of 2023 2. the present Civil Revision Petition is filed on the ground that under Or 21 rule 64 without attaching the property that property cannot be liable to be sold by public auction in execution of a decree, hence prayed to allow the civil revision petition by setting aside the order dated 15.11.2024 in E.P. No: 36 of 2023. 2 The counsel for the petitioner referring the below 3. said rules would submit that as envisaged under rule 54 of Order 21 that an immovable property shall be attached by an order of the court to be sold by public auction in execution of a decree but in the present case the property belong to the petitioner was not attached hence the impugned order is liable to be set aside. It would be apposite to refer to some of the provisions of the CPC which provides a procedure for executing a decree and have been relied upon by the learned counsel for the Petitioner / Judgment Debtor and the same is extracted here under to answer the issue raised by the counsel for the petitioner; 4. Under Rule 64 of Order XXI ; Power to order property attached to be sold and proceeds to be paid to person entitled : Any Court executing a decree may order that any property attached by it and liable to sale, or such portion thereof as may see necessary to satisfy the decree, shall be sold, and that the proceeds of such sale, or a sufficient portion thereof, shall be paid to the party entitled under the decree to receive the same. I 3 Under Rule 66 of Order XXI : Proclamation of sales by r public auction. - (1) Where any property is ordered to be sold by public auction in execution of a decree, the Court shall cause a proclamation of the intended sale to be made in the language of such Court. (2) Such proclamation shall be draw up after notice to the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor and shall state the time and place of sale, and specify as fairly and accurately as possible- (a) the property to be sold [or, where a part of the property would be sufficient to satisfy the decree, such part] [Inserted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1976, Section 12, (w.e.f 1.2.1977).]\ (b) the revenue assessed upon the estate, where the property to be sold is an interest in an estate or in part of an estate paying revenue to the Government; (c) any encumbrance to which the property is liable; (d) the amount for the recovery of which the sale is ordered; and (e) the value of the property as stated (i) by the decree-holder, and (ii) by the judgment-debtor: [Provided that where notice of the date for settling the terms of the proclamation has been given to the judgment-debtor by means of an order under rule 54, it I shall not be necessary to give notice under this rule to the judgment-debtor unless the Court directs; Provided further that nothing in this rule shall be construed as requiring the Court to enter in the proclamation of sale its own estimate of the value of the property, but the proclamation shall include the estimate if any, given, by either or both of the parties.] [InsertGd by thB CodG of Civil ProcGdurG (AmGndiriGnt) Act, 1976, SGction 12, (w.G.f 1.2.1977).] (3) Every application for an order for sale under this rule shall be accompanied by a statement signed and verified in the manner hereinbefore prescribed for the signing and verification of pleadings and containing far as they are known to or can be ascertained by the person making the verification, the matters required by sub-rule (2) to be specified in the proclamation. (4) For the purpose of ascertaining the matters to be specified in the proclamation, the Court otherwise so may summon any person whom it thinks necessary to summon and may examine him in respect to any such matters and require him to produce any document in his possession or power relating thereto. 5 Rule 54 of Order XXI: reads thus; 5. f 54. Attachment of immovable properly- (1) Where the property is immovable, the attachment shall be made by an order prohibiting the judgment-debtor from transferring or charging the property in any way, and all persons from taking any benefit from such transfer or charge. (1A) The order shall also require the judgment-debtor to attend Court on a specified date to take notice of the date to be fixed for settling the terms of the proclamation of sale." 6. Court refers the following provision: Section 51; Powers of Court to enforce execution Subject to such conditions and limitations as may be prescribed, the Court may, on the application of the decree- holder, order execution of the decree- (a) by delivery of any property specifically decreed; (b) by attachment and sale or by sale without attachment of any property; (c) by arrest and detention in prison; (d) by appointing a receiver; or (e) in such other manner as the nature of the relief granted may require. 6 7. Attachment is a process in execution but does not itself constitute execution. A bare perusal of the section 51 (b) of CPC that provides that the Court, on the application of the decree- holder, order execution for enforce of the decree - by attachment and sale or by sale without attachment of any property. That an attachment only operates as a valid prohibition against alienation of the attached property, mere non-attachment of the property that it would not cause any substantial injury to the revision petitioner. Section is substantive law, rules made are procedural because it regulates the manner in which substantive rights can be enforced by judicial action. Under section 51(b) of CPC the court can sale the property without attachment. The revision petitioner in the execution proceedings argued 8. that he does not have a right of title to the property included in the execution schedule. On the admission of the revision petitioner, who is the judgment debtor, the execution court made a categorical finding that the petitioner is the owner of the property, despite the petitioner/J.Dr.'s false defence taken by the petitioner. In view of the above discussion, this Court comes to the 9. irresistible conclusion that the present revision is filed 7 mischievously to delay the proceedings and under Section 51(b) of CPC, the Court can sale the property without attachment, the revision petition is lacks merit and accordingly stands dismissed with costs of Rs. 10,000/- (in words ten thousands only) that is payable by the petitioner to the decree holder with in a period of two weeks from the date of the order failing which the execution court is hereby ordered the petitioner / J.Dr. may be detained in a civil prison for one week. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending in this Civil Revision Petition shall stand closed. Sd/- G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR i //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Addanki, Prakasam District. 2. One CC to Sri Koti Reddy Idamakanti Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Inakollu Venkateswarlu Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three CD Copies RDB sree HIGH COURT DATED:07/03/2025 ORDER CRP.No.383 of 2025 AMD« X 2 t MAR 2025 m a^ . Current Section ^ DISMISSING THE C.R.P. WITHOUT COSTS