ll 1′!-ll HIGH
mun um mm 7:: mm or mmn ii
~«—– —- an an-nnmnuna-nun In» A Q’A’!Il}(.V ‘-
Tl-ll: H”li’iii..ii fixcauiru ‘an y.ug 3
WP
.No.24532[_2005’~ _ M M –
BETWEEN:
1
hi)
THE ExEr:.u’rIvE g;’m:+1N;EE1g _
i_ii-‘FER KRESHNA ;
sac DIVISION N02 ‘- _ ‘
nHnmMAR,4wANm’irm’;
TQSHAEiAP11R [ =: V ”
NOW .SH’iFfE_[)f.HT KBdNL.._«- i; A
NRBC = =. >b.=.
‘Fi~i’£”} f~$’ts.I}9I~’3Ri3*v$i1’%3}m.i!-%!3 Szmznsaa
CEANAL 7.’r;m«*.._’ no ” – _ ‘
UPPER Kfiififififi’
RHF3F}MARRYA’NAGUD¥
TQ SH’AHPl_lR-_, D!S’i’~–f}llLBAR(?cA ‘
; New SHEFTEVD TO CANAL CIRCLE NO 2
K,msHNAPUR~-, ——– ~ –
S}!.CR.£.P_UR TALJK,
A T.c’;u_LBAl3GA DlS’I’RlC’l’. PETITIONERS
‘(B;f”sn’ : .1’v.i’fEft*.i3VRAVI )
AIW :. V
!! SHIVARAMI REDDY
SIO MUNNI REDDY
AGE”:.} 42 ‘EAR
0CC:CONTRAC’l’OR.
or Iuuuurr xr an ‘
R/O CAMP GOUDGEFA
POST NEGNOOR
PRF.SF.N’l’l.V M10,
v.A.1K.t_ImA_n_1aAM,
TIRUPATI.
(By Sri: P HARISH CHANDRA ~
THIS WP 15 FILED PRAYIEK3 T0″-SET A%3.!DvE~’–!.’HEi
ORDER m’. 15.9.05 BY TI-lE””Cl”«’lL Jl;i1)[_iE«.'{Sii?DN.}
SI-IORAPUR IN EP.No.5_]o4 AT__AN!fi[-Gr_V IN ISSU_ING£’l’HE
AWACHMENT WARRANT’ AGAISNT MOVARIF.
‘PRQPERT!ES 0? THE PM’£’!’.!QNE{.RE:, ‘ ‘
‘v’v’1″-it –ci:u”fii&rg_ t’fifi’_ ‘hr-at-iag tfis
day. the C°””;*”‘**3§’t*h¢;t_f°13**¢Viua:”” ..
m.”L by the. outer
ill. I.lIJl..l. mu.-u.. a.- .. ..5._.
Fshompur __ié.si1aricc of ai’f£7M’;”-i’1IiE’l€’.i”1f v’r*anun””t ctvf
v _ of thé jiidgment debtor with a dimction to deposit
to the: decree holder as per the ceaktttlntion
the sttpplcmcntal agreement exnrcutcd
by dmu_-1-V, ‘ holder on or before. 20.10.2005.
H * 2. The essential facts of the case lemiing upto this
wysigit petition an: as follows:
\\9J~
The Execution Petition No.5/’Q0134 was
executing urbitml cleczec obtained in. Misc. {Not ‘ V.
Yadgiri dated 23.1.1934. The A”
in MFA.No.1649/84 by order cI;=»m:[f fa’ 13,3
execution petition debtor . L’
contending that he has excess: of
V:-I-I¥~
3
L1-I-I I IJJMIV. 4-I’~..lE_-I – -HAL}!-J I
I
I-‘-.’a.5′?..’}l’2,’» and o 4-3′–‘itm-5 “59’* The
“” “ii’S ai’u–mi*u’ed hr
F .
_I_.i.4.-
(tau
H
H!»
court hoiding ‘thut
Rs.57,0131.-its holder and an
ordeited __ wamant. Both the reuaono
asoignt-a:1 i;hy for issuance of attachment
wtgtrunt as it is clear from the objections
” debtor to the execution petition that
…-..- -….-u..- . -..-.u-…. u—…
” teem 2-,r.=;d ob;-n.-o.o-.~.s -3…:-.,-o. 18-‘fiimu-)5 mr-ma by
the j-.:;=mm* in
AA Rs.13,98,573i– was due. payment of
3111.-‘=.In=,.u.
gt… .’……_-..__._ ……¢…¢.¢…u-
.1 …_J_.g 41…’ ..-l.’
I Ullltil l’..l.._Il.’I.l i1J.l.I.I.”.I.l..Il’ U1.
‘VRo;’l4.55.585]- is paid and wherefore. there is excess
payment of Ro.57.012/-. The trial court has proceeded on
UM
the basis that the said amount is admitted amount.
be paid which is clearly erroneous. The owner. V’
assigned by the executing court V’
was issuetl on 12.7.2000 itselfis
order has been meek! onVlt1§e…V_ap1§lic1§ti3n “jthe.
tor on g~.~.nL.*::!—-that l-.’~’.=’~£’L.a.a* -‘-=- l’ *=-“–‘-*-”’ in the
C
II!’ atnpn flan _ V.
\ I.- I Jul 1.1V «~_,’_A I.}_I.v.’I|..I
3… .,..,.._.._. .. ..
‘sf not anlotint
due by the degree hoirfle;-‘.’r.~ 9:’ 001:1 that the
impugned warrant of
1novnb1ep__by”fl_1e’ a direction to deposit
the amo1.i1niVt:,-._» holder suffers from the error ‘
appmr.-ni eth¢”nr;§¢s§’%’ fielder and is liable to be set
13003 the following order:
n f _’l’h§’vAé(‘rit::’1,:4:.tition is allowed. Order dated 15.9.2005
iéatiing citléigélfinent of movables of the judgment writer
with’ R. to deposit the. due amount to the decree.-.
V’ ~l_i.o’lt:1e.’.fr as the e»:a1eI.I_Ln.tir_sn t:.=I.1r_ing ‘Into mmll the
V’ Input I’ I 41′ 19: 1-‘Alum. I-..-.’l.l….
‘ a-Inc’-I-I -11 an can-gculnunf gun’:-I,III’ Inn: In an _ A
D”‘__I1..’l..’.I¢.II.’l-W.vI.I.I.I.’I..l. I-‘I5.lC-L-I-I-I-C-\.I.I.l. W3-fl.C~L>I.I.l.C7′.l. I!’ l-IIC- l.I’:’l.’I”.’-‘..’- ll LEE!
0)» –
J
on or bcfom 20.10.2005 is set asicle. and the
court is directed to dispose of the execution 1 ”
accordance with law. after oonsidmitig. ‘mg 0
filed by the judgment debtor.