Judgment :- 1. The above civil revision petitions are filed to direct the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tiruvannamalai, to conduct enquiry on the memo of calculation filed by the petitioner/JD and the objections of the respondents/DH in REP Nos.6 and 7 of 2000 in C.C.Nos.1 & 2 of 1999. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, who would echo the cride couer of his client, by inviting the attention of this Court to the memo of calculation filed by the revision petitioner/judgement debtor, which is available at page Nos.5 to 8, to the effect that the Executing Court, without conducting an enquiry relating to the discharge of the decreetal dues and also the over payment made by the judgement debtor, simply ordered for further payment. 3. A perusal of the records would reveal that no doubt the revision petitioner/judgement debtor filed the memo of calculation in REP.Nos.6 and 7 of 2000 in C.C.Nos.1 & 2 of 1999; whereupon objection was filed by the decree holder. The last entry in the memo of calculation, which is available at page No.7 of the typed set of papers, would show that the revision petitioner/judgement debtor suomoto calculated 12% interest with effect from the date of decree, which calculation the decree holder disputed by pointing out that as per the award 24% should be calculated. It appears there is difference of opinion between the decree holder and the judgement debtor relating to the very calculation itself. 4. These C.R.Ps. were actually filed during the month of April 2012. Now the, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Executing Court without conducting even means enquiry as well as the other enquiry relating to the actual dues payable by the judgement debtor to the decree holder, simply ordered arrest also. If that is so, it is for the revision petitioner/judgement debtor to file necessary revision petition as against the order of arrest, which will be considered by the Court on merits. 5. The civil revision petitions are disposed of accordingly. However, there is no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.