18-02-2015 -           In this revision petition, the Jt. Drs./Petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.08.2014 by which the Learned Executing Court confirmed the valuation report filed on behalf of the Decree Holder and directed the Jt. Drs. to proceed to comply with the order on  the basis of valuation  report available on the record.

2.      Mr. Bijay Kumar Pandey, Learned Counsel appearing for the Jt. Drs.  submitted that the petitioner accepts the valuation report submitted on behalf of the Decree Holder fixing the market price as on November 2006 at Rs. 90,000/-, but the Decree Holder is required to deposit the auto and the difference amount and only thereafter the Jt. Drs. can comply the order.

3.     The Petitioner was required to furnish the details of the difference of amount required to be deposited by the Decree Holder. Whatever the Jt. Drs. wanted to say, he could say before the Executing Court but he did not take steps in the Executing court on and after 13.08.2014.

4.       In the circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order.  The Jt. Drs. is directed to appear in the Execution Case regularly and comply with the order in question without any further delay.

          This revision petition is dismissed, with these observations and   direction.

Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.

                  Ranchi,

                        Dated:-18-02-2015