Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

G P Mallikarjunappa vs G H Sudha W/O G P Mallikarjunappa

High Court Of Karnataka|30 January, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA WRIT PETITION NO.2518/2017 (GM-FC) BETWEEN:
G.P. MALLIKARJUNAPPA S/O LATE PARAMESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS ASST. TEACHER GOVERNMENT HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL V.BENAVALLI VILLAGE AYNOOR POST SHIMOGA TALUK – 577 211 … PETITIONER (BY SRI.PRASAD B.S., ADV.) AND:
G.H. SUDHA W/O G.P. MALLIKARJUNAPPA D/O LATE G.R. HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS PRESENTLY R/AT ‘SRI LAKSHMI’, RANGANATHA NILAYA 5TH ‘B’ CROSS, 1ST STAGE VINOBANAGARA SHIMOGA – 577 201 … RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE REGISTRATION OF EXECUTION PETITION DATED 21.07.2016 IN EXECUTION PETITION NO.4/2016 PENDING ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT AT SHIMOGA PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE – K AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking that the registration of Execution Petition dated 21.07.2016 in E.P.No.4/2016 be quashed.
2. The respondent herein has initiated the recovery proceedings in E.P.No.4/2016. The petitioner herein, who is arrayed as ‘Judgment Debtor’ has been notified.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the present execution petition relates to the interim maintenance which had been granted for recovery of which the execution petition cannot proceed as the main matter has ultimately been disposed of as not pressed by the respondent.
4. Though such contention is putforth in the instant petition, this Court need not go into that aspect of the matter inasmuch as the objection said to have been filed by the petitioner has not yet been considered by the Executing Court and no orders in that regard has been passed. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to urge the contentions before the Court below and only if the order passed is against the petitioner, challenge to the same will arise.
5. In that view, the petition being premature at this stage is disposed of with liberty to urge all contentions before the Executing Court.
Sd/- JUDGE ST
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

G P Mallikarjunappa vs G H Sudha W/O G P Mallikarjunappa

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
30 January, 2017
Judges
  • A S Bopanna