APHC010583442025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) Tuesday, the Second day of December, Two Thousand and Twenty Five The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Civil Revision Petition No. Between: 1. N.Rajeswari, W/o. G.Venkataswamy, aged 44 years, Occupation : Business, R/o.D.No.6 Ananthapuramu District. 1. N.Sreedevi, W/o.N.Chandrasekhar Reddy, aged 48 years, Business, R/o.D.No.1 District. Counsel for the petitioner: 1. N.Aswartha Narayana Counsel for the respondent: 1. Allu Hari Narayana IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) Tuesday, the Second day of December, Two Thousand and Twenty Five Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Civil Revision Petition No. 2952 of 2025 N.Rajeswari, W/o. G.Venkataswamy, aged 44 years, Occupation : Business, R/o.D.No.6-3-249-1, Ram Nagar, Ananthapuramu, Ananthapuramu District. ...Petitioner and N.Sreedevi, W/o.N.Chandrasekhar Reddy, aged 48 years, Occupation : Business, R/o.D.No.1-4-564, Arunodaya Colony, Ananthapuramu ...Respondent. Counsel for the petitioner: N.Aswartha Narayana Counsel for the respondent: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3311] Tuesday, the Second day of December, Two Thousand and Twenty Five N.Rajeswari, W/o. G.Venkataswamy, aged 44 years, Occupation : 1, Ram Nagar, Ananthapuramu, ...Petitioner Occupation : 564, Arunodaya Colony, Ananthapuramu ...Respondent. 2 BSB,J C.R.P.No.2952 of 2025 The Court made the following order: This civil revision petition is filed under section 115 of Civil Procedure Code against the docket order dated 11.09.2025 passed in E.P.No.60 of 2023 in O.S.No.560 of 2017 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ananthapuramu. 2. The respondent / decree holder filed E.P.No.60 of 2023 for recovery of money by sale of the property describing the schedule as follows: “Property situated at RD of Ananthapuramu and SRD of Ananthapuramu Rural and within the village limits of Kakkalapalli and within the municipal corporation limits of Ananthapuramu :- Ward-6 Sy.No.59 / 1A; Extent: Ac.0.02.90 cents; H.S.0.0116; Plot No.26; L.P.No.323/81; old Door No.6-3-249-1. Bounded by : East : 35 feet Wide Road, South : Remaining extent in Plot No.26 belongs to G.Venkataswamy, West : Plot No.20 North : Plot No.25 Measurements :- East – West : 60’ feet or 20.00 Meters, North-South:21’ feet or 7.00 Meters. (M.V.Rs.6,00,000/-)”. 3. Pending adjudication of the proceedings, the D.Hr. filed a memo stating that the J.Dr. executed a gift deed in respect of a portion of E.P.schedule property and requested the Court to exclude the property gifted by J.Dr. from execution. Recording the memo, the execution Court permitted the D.Hr. to amend the schedule of the property by excluding the property gifted by J.Dr 3 BSB,J C.R.P.No.2952 of 2025 prior to the order of the attachment and posted the matter to 17.09.2025 for the purpose of carrying out the amendment and filing neat copy. 4. Aggrieved by the said order passed on docket on 11.09.2025, this revision petition is filed. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no such order can be passed on a memo without specifying the details of the property to be amended. He further submitted that a separate application seeking amendment of the schedule shall be filed and therefore, the order passed by the execution Court on memo, is liable to be set aside. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent / D.Hr submitted that the D.Hr filed an application seeking amendment of the E.P. schedule vide C.F.No.3629 dated 10.09.2025, but the same was returned by the execution Court on 19.11.2025 with the objection : “memo filed for amendment and amendment carried out. Hence, time 7 days”. The petition was filed after serving notice to the J.Dr.’s counsel. On taking the notice, an endorsement was made praying time for filing counter. 7. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that since a regular petition for amendment is filed and clear description of the property is sought to be given by way of amendment, an opportunity may be given to the D.Hr. to proceed with the petition, in the event of setting aside the docket order dated 11.09.2025. 8. In the light of the above circumstances and the subsequent developments, this Court is of the view that the order impugned in the revision can be set aside and the D.Hr. can be given liberty to represent the petition vide C.F.No.3629 dated 10.09.2025, which shall thereafter be decided on merits. 4 BSB,J C.R.P.No.2952 of 2025 9. Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed, docket order in E.P.No.60 of 2023 in O.S.No.560 of 2017 dated 11.09.2025 is set aside. The D.Hr. is given liberty to represent the petition vide C.F.No.3629 dated 10.09.2025 within one (01) week from the date of receipt of the copy of this order and thereafter the petition shall be heard disposed within a period of one (01) month giving opportunity to the J.Dr. to file counter therein. There shall be no orders as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this civil revision petition shall stand closed. ___________________ ___ JUSTICE B.S. BHANUMATHI Dated. 02.12.2025 Note: CC by 04.12.2025 GRL 5 BSB,J C.R.P.No.2952 of 2025 114 The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi C.R.P. No.2952 of 2025 Dated. 02.12.2025 Note: CC by 04.12.2025 GRL