Judgment 1. The Civil Revision Petition has been filed to get set aside the order dated 09.02.2012 passed in E.P.No.23 of 2011 in M.C.O.P.No.67 of 2002, by the learned Subordinate Judge, Ramanathapuram. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The learned Counsel for the revision petitioner would echo the cri de coeur and heart burns of his client to the effect that the Executing Court in E.P.No.23 of 2011 attached the bus of the revision petitioner and it is kept pending ever since February 2012. 4. The learned Counsel for the respondent/Indira would submit that earlier, it appears that the same petitioner filed an application to get the delay condoned in filing the application to get set aside the exparte award; the said application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was condoned; however, the petitioner fails to prosecute the application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was dismissed; without taking steps to get it restored, a fresh application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was filed. 5. However, the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner would try to give a different version of the occurrences relating to the steps taken to get the exparte award set aside. 6. Be that as it may, now this Court is concerned with the attachment order passed by the lower Court and the actual attachment of the bus which has been in the custody of the Court ever since February 2012 onwards. If the bus is kept in idleness, certainly, that would get damaged and it would not be beneficial to either of the parties. It is also quite obvious that considerable time would be taken for bringing the property for sale. The revision petitioner herein, being the Corporation, the Officials of the Corporation, should not have allowed to grow grass under their feet and they should not have slept at the wheel and slept at the switch. Such attitude on the part of the officials of the Corporation should be condemned in unmistakable terms. 7. The revision petitioner herein, being the Corporation, the Officials of the Corporation, should not have allowed to grow grass under their feet and they should not have slept at the wheel and slept at the switch. Such attitude on the part of the officials of the Corporation should be condemned in unmistakable terms. 7. However, in the interest of safeguarding the public property and in the interest of justice, I would like to pass the order to the effect that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs and Fifty Thousand Only) out of the compensation awarded as per the exparte award within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Whereupon, the bus shall be released on the execution of the bond by the Branch Manager concerned undertaking that he would produce the bus, whenever the Court might order him to do so. In the meanwhile, the lower Court which is seized of the I.A.Nos.56 and 94 of 2012 shall dispose of it within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The sum of Rs.6,50,000/-(Rupees Six Lakhs and Fifty Thousand Only) shall be kept in interest bearing fixed deposit by the lower Court pending the lower Court passing suitable orders on the I.A. and other proceedings relating thereto, depending upon the out come of the proceedings, suitable orders if any to be passed by the lower Court, regarding the said sum. 8. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs.