GANDIKOTA PEDDANNA Vs. MUVVAJA SURAIAH
LAWS(APH)-1992-1-1
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on January 24,1992

GANDIKOTA PEDDANNA Appellant
VERSUS
MUVVAJA SURAIAH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The judgment debtors are the revision petitioners herein. The respondent decree holder filed a suit for permanent injunction in respect of Ac. 2-66 cents of agricultural land. The suit was decreed on 6-4-77. On 11-7-86, the respondent filed E P No. 100 of 1986 under order 21 Rule 32 (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure to execute the decree by arresting all the judgment debtors. The learned District Munsif Parchur after considering the oral evidence adduced before him came to the conclusion that the judgment debtors have not satisfied the court that the land on the Eastern side of the Decree holder's land belongs to one Nakka Narayanamma. Relying upon the oral evidence as well as the Commissioner's report and the Commissioner's evidence the learned District Munsif arrived at the conclusion that there is an encrdachment on the decree holder's land. Hence agreeing with the contention of the decree holder, the learned District Munsif allowed the execution petition and directed the arrest of the judgment debtors for a period of four weeks.
(2.)Aggrieved by the said decision, the judgment debters preferred the above revision petition.
(3.)The learned counsel for the revision petitioners attacked the order under revision on many grounds viz, 1) that an ex parte commissioner was appointed on 11-7-86 without notice to the judgment debtors : 2) that the executing Court allowed the execution petition on the ground that the respondents (judgment debtors) failed to prove their case whereas it is the duty of the decree holder to prove that the judgment debtors have encroached upon the land : 3) that no affidavit was filed as required under Order 21 Rule 11 A of the Code of Civil Procedure : and 4) that there is no positive proof of encroachment. He therefore, argued that the order of the executing Court arresting the judgment debtors and committing them to Civil Prison is liable to be set aside.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.