IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION Nos.37294-37297/2017 C/W WRIT PETITION Nos.37298-37303/2017(GM-CPC) IN WP Nos.37294-37297/2017 BETWEEN:
1. SRI PAYANNARA GOVINDAPPA, S/O HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, 2. SRI GOWDRU NAGAPPA, S/O OBALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, 3. SRI NANJAIAHNA TIMMANNA, S/O OBALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, 4. SRI YAGANNARA OBALAPPA, S/O OBALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, ALL R/AT HULLEHALLI VILLAGE, BIRUR POST, BIRUR HOBLI, KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT -577 548.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI SUBRAMANYA R., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI PARAMESHWARAPPA, S/O SANNATHIMMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, 2. SRI PUTTAPPA, S/O SANNATHIMMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, 3. SRI BASAVARAJA, S/O SANNATHIMMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, ALL R/AT HULLEHALLI VILLAGE, BIRUR POST, BIRUR HOBLI, KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 548.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI R.C. NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R3; V/O DT. 03/10/17 NOTICE TO R-2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED IN EXECUTION NO.40/2012 DATED 26.7.2017 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KADUR VIDE ANNEXURE-A.
IN W.P. Nos.37298-37303/2017 BETWEEN:
1. SRI SATHYAPPANA GOVINDAPPA, S/O SATHYAPPAJ, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST.
2. SRI SATTALAKKANNANA THIMMARAYAPPA, S/O NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST 3. SRI GOWDRA OBALAPPA, S/O OBALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST 4. SRI DAWE NARASIMHAPPA, S/O THIMMANNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST 5. SRI SATTANNARA GURUMURTHY, S/O THIMMARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST 6. SRI NANJUNDAPPA, S/O GOVINDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST ALL R/AT HULLEHALLI VILLAGE, BIRUR POST, BIRUR HOBLI, KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT 577548.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI SUBRAMANYA R., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI NARASIMHANNA, S/O THIMMANNA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST 2. SRI PUTTANNA NARASAPPA, S/O PUTTANNA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST ALL R/AT HULLEHALLI VILLAGE, BIRUR POST, BIRUR HOBLI, KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT 577548.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI R.C. NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
V/O DT. 03/10/17 NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED IN EXECUTION NO.38/2012 DATED 26.7.2017 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KADUR VIDE ANNEXURE-A.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R These writ petitions are filed by the judgment debtors against the order dated 26.7.2017 made in Execution Nos.38/2012 and 40/2012 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Kadur allowing the Execution Petitions filed by the decree holders under Order 21 Rule 32 r/w Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure and rejecting the objections raised by the judgment debtors and sentencing the judgment debtors to undergo civil prison for three months in view of violation and disobedience of the decree passed by the trial Court in O.S. Nos.503/2000 and 515/2000.
2. The respondents – plaintiffs in both these writ petitions, who are the decree holders filed O.S. Nos.503/2000 and 515/2000 for declaration and injunction in respect of the suit schedule properties morefully described in the schedules to the respective suits against the defendants-judgment debtors contending that they are the owners of the suit schedule properties. The same was disputed by the defendants by filing the written statement. The trial Court by separate Judgment & Decree dated 1.8.2008 made in O.S. Nos.503/2000 and 515/2000 decreed the suits filed by the plaintiffs and declared that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners in possession of the suit schedule properties in the respective suits and restrained the defendants - judgment debtors by means of Permanent Injunction from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties by the plaintiffs in any manner in the respective suits.
3. Aggrieved by the said Judgment & Decree in the said suits, the Judgment Debtors filed R.A. Nos.33/2008 and 34/2008 before the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.,), Kadur who after hearing both the parties by a separate Judgment & Decree dated 26.5.2009 dismissed the appeals filed by the defendants.
4. Aggrieved by the said Judgment & Decree passed by the Courts below, the judgment debtors filed RSA Nos.926/2009 and 927/2009 before this Court. This Court clubbing both the said appeals by the Judgment & Decree dated 23.2.2012 dismissed the appeals confirming the Judgment & Decree passed by the Courts below. The said Judgment and Decree in second appeals have reached finality.
5. The Decree holders filed Execution Nos.38/2012 and 40/2012 before the Prl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Kadur under Order 21 Rule 32 r/w Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure stating that inspite of the Judgment & Decree passed by the Courts below and confirmed by this Court, the Judgment debtors have illegally violated and disobeyed the Judgment & Decree passed by the Courts and therefore they are liable to be prosecuted under law and ultimately sought for attaching the properties of the judgment debtors and for detaining them in civil prison. The said Execution Petitions are resisted by the judgment debtors stating that they never disobeyed the Judgment & decree passed by the Courts.
6. The Executing Court considering the Execution Petitions and the objections and entire material on record by the impugned orders dated 26.7.2017 allowed the Execution Petitions filed under Order 21 Rule-32 r/w Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure and rejected the objections filed by the judgment debtors and sentenced the judgment debtors to undergo civil prison for three months in view of the violation and disobedience of the Judgment & decree made in O.S. Nos.503/2000 and 515/2000. Being aggrieved, the judgment debtors filed the present writ petitions.
7. When these writ petitions came up for preliminary hearing before this Court on 9.10.2017, this Court after hearing both the parties granted interim order of stay enabling the petitioners to file affidavits of undertaking to the effect that they would comply the Judgment & Decree passed by the Courts below and that they would ensure that the said decree is not violated by them.
8. In pursuance of the orders passed by this Court stated supra, the petitioner Nos.2 and 4 in Writ Petition Nos.37294-37297/2017 and all the petitioners in Writ Petition Nos.37298-37303/2017 filed personal affidavits dated 23.10.2017 before this Court tendering remorseful and unconditional apology that they will obey the Judgment & decree made in O.S. Nos.503/2000 and 515/2000, which is affirmed by this Court in RSA Nos.926/2009 and 927/2009 on 23.2.2012. In the personal affidavits, judgment debtors have also undertaken and assured this Court that they will not disturb and interfere with the possession of the decree holders in respect of the suit schedule properties in both the suits.
9. Sri Subramanya, learned counsel for the petitioners on instructions from petitioner Nos.2 and 4 in W.P. NOs.37294-37297/2017 submits that petitioner No.1 – Payannara Govindappa and petitioner No.3 – Nanjaiahna Timmanna will obey the orders passed by the trial Court in O.S. Nos.503/2000 and 515/2000 as well as this Court in RSA Nos.926/2009 and 927/2009 on par with the other petitioners who filed unconditional apology before this Court. The said submission is placed on record.
10. The same is not opposed by Sri R.C. Nagaraj, learned counsel for respondents/decree holders.
11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is not in dispute that the decree holders filed two separate suits in O.S. Nos. 503/2000 and 515/2000 for declaration and Permanent Injunction in respect of the respective suit schedule properties. The same came to be decreed and affirmed by the lower appellate Court in R.A. Nos.33/2008 and 34/2008 and re-affirmed by this Court in RSA Nos.926/2009 and 927/2009 on 23.2.2012. The decree granted by the trial Court and re-affirmed by this Court has reached finality. The Executing Court after enquiry has categorically recorded a finding that the judgment debtors have disobeyed the decree passed by the trial Court in O.S. Nos.503/2000 and 515/2000 and therefore passed the impugned orders.
12. In pursuance of the order passed by this Court on 9.10.2017 in the present writ petitions directing the petitioners to file affidavits, all the petitioners in W.P. Nos.37298-37303/2017 and petitioner Nos.2 and 4 in W.P.
NOs.37294-37297/2017 have filed personal affidavits and the submissions made by the learned counsel on behalf of Petitioner Nos.1 and 3 in W.P. NOs.37294-37297/2017 is recorded as stated supra.
13. In view of the categorical affidavits filed and statements made by the learned counsel representing petitioners – judgment debtors that all the judgment debtors will obey the decree passed by the trial Court and affirmed by this Court as stated supra and since the petitioners – judgment debtors have also undertaken and assured in the personal affidavits that they will not disturb and interfere with the possession of respondents – decree holders in respect of the suit schedule properties in O.S. Nos.503/2000 and 515/2000, the impugned orders passed by the Executing Court sentencing the judgment debtors to undergo civil prison for three months have to be modified.
14. For the reasons stated above, the impugned orders passed by the Executing Court insofar as sentencing the petitioners - judgment debtors in both the writ petitions to undergo civil prison for three months is hereby quashed subject to the condition that petitioners - judgment debtors shall obey the decree passed by the trial Court in O.S. Nos.503/2000 and 515/2000 as per their undertaking and the statement made at the Bar by the learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions. If petitioners – judgment debtors violate Judgment & Decree made in O.S. No.503/2000 and 515/2000 in future, it is always open for the respondents – decree holders to file Execution Petition and in such an event, there should not be any further leniency in favour of the judgment debtors and they have to be punished in accordance with law.
With the above observations, the writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Gss/-