IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE CRP No.301 OF 2017 BETWEEN THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS, GOVT. OF KARNATAKA, PWD COMPOUND K.R. CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560 001. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. R V NAIK, ADV.) AND 1. SRI. C NARAYANA S/O CHINNAPPA @ SONUSA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O 66, 1ST C MAIN ROAD, HAMPINAGAR, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 040.
2. SRI. SHIVA KUMAR S/O CHINNAPPA @ SONUSA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, NO.1, 1ST MAIN 1ST CROSS, HOSAHALLI, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 040. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. LOURDU MARIYAPPA, ADV.) THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.115 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 1.7.2017 PASSED IN EX/34/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANEKAL, BENGALURU RURAL ISSUING A/W/M AGAINST JDR BY 28/10/2017.
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard Sri R.V.Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Lourdu Mariyappa, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned Counsel for the petitioner, the matter is heard finally.
2. In this revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 9.7.2017 passed in Ex.No.34/2015 by the trial Court wherein the trial Court has directed for issuance of attachment warrant of movables against the Judgment Debtor-petitioner herein.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed objections with regard to recalling the warrant of attachment and memo of calculation filed by the decree holder. However, without considering the same, on 09.07.2017 warrant of attachment has been issued in respect of the movables.
4. In view of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits, impugned order be set aside and executing Court be directed to consider the objections of the petitioner as well as to consider the memo of calculations filed by the parties in an expeditious manner.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and taking into account the fact that the impugned order has been passed without considering the objections filed by the petitioner, impugned order dated 9.7.2017 is set aside and the Executing Court is directed to consider the objections filed by the petitioners as well as to consider the memo of calculation filed by both the parties and to decide the same with a speaking order within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Accordingly, the revision petition is disposed of.
Sk/-
CT-HR Sd/- JUDGE