Telangana High Court
CCCA/230/2001 of SMT.D.UMA DEVI AND ANR Vs M/S.MODEL FINANCIAL CORP LD. HYD AND 5 ORS on 15 November 2001
SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT C.C.C.A.No.230 of 2001 JUDGMENT: (Per LNR,J) The 1st respondent filed O.S.No.91 of 1998 in the Court of II Additional District Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, against respondents 2 to 6 and appellants herein
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDYANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATTC.C.C.A.No.230 of 2001
JUDGMENT: (Per LNR,J)
The 1[st] respondent filed O.S.No.91 of 1998 in theCourt of II Additional District Judge, City Civil Court,Hyderabad, against respondents 2 to 6 and appellantsherein (defendants 6 and 7) for recovery of a sum ofRs.19,57,101-69 ps. with interest. While the 2[nd]respondent was the principal borrower, respondents 3 to 6and the appellants herein are said to be guarantors for therepayment of loan. The trial Court decreed the suit asprayed for through judgment, dated 11.06.2001. Heard Sri Ghouse Bhasha, learned counsel for theappellants and Sri Vasantha Rayudu, learned counsel forthe 1[st] respondent.
Left to itself, the 2[nd] defendant-the principalborrower did not assail the decree. The appellants hereinalso did not seek any stay of execution of the decree. It isbrought to the notice of this Court that the decree has notbeen executed yet.
In case, the decree has already been executed,nothing remains to be decided in this appeal. If on theother hand, the decree has not been executed, for thepast more than 12 years, we have got our own doubt as towhether any E.P. can be filed at this stage. Even if it isotherwise permissible, for the decree holder to executethe decree, the appellants can raise their objections in theE.P. or insist that they cannot be proceeded against, unless the steps vis-a-vis the principal borrower areexhausted. This order however cannot be construed asextending the limitation for execution of the decree in anymanner.
We therefore dispose of the appeal with the aboveobservation.
The miscellaneous petition filed in this appeal shallalso stand disposed of. There shall be no order as tocosts.
______________________
L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J
_________________
S.V.BHATT,
J
Date: 24.07.2013JSU
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDYAND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT
JSU
C.C.C.A.No.230 of 2001
Date: 24.07.2013