IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.50925 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) Between:
Sri.S.Chandrashekar @ Babu, Son of Late Srinivasa Reddy @ Srinivasappa, Aged about 49 years, Residing at No.G4-105, Green Wood Regency, Doddakannelli, Sarjapur Road, Bengaluru-560 035. …Petitioner (By Sri.C.Shankar Reddy, Advocate) And:
1. Sri.Narayanaswamy, Son of late Srinivasa Reddy @ Srinivasappa, Aged about 60 years, Residing 100, Police Muniswamy Reddy Road Cross, Motappanapalya, Indiranagar, Bengaluru-560 038.
2. Miss Girija, Daughter of late Srinivasa Reddy @ Srinivasappa, Aged about 55 years, 3. Miss.Nandini, Daughter of late Shashikala, Aged about 31 years, 4. Sri.Anjan Kumar Sanath, Son of late Shashikala, Aged about 29 years, Respondents 2 to 4 are R/at No.55/1, ‘Siri Nilaya’, 9th Cross, 10th Main Road, Motappanapalya, Indiranagar, Bengaluru-560 038. …Respondents (By Sri.R.Nataraj, Advocate for R1 to R4) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 22.09.2018 passed in execution petition No.1616/2018 on the file of the Hon’ble X Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-26) as found in Annexure-J to the writ petition.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Heard the petitioner’s counsel and the respondents’ counsel.
2. The petitioner has challenged issuance of delivery warrant against him in Execution Case No.1616/2018. According to the petitioner, he was not served with suit summons. He was not served with the notice in the final decree proceedings. After final decree proceedings, the respondents initiated execution petition, and sought for delivery warrant. It is also forthcoming from the records that the petitioner has filed two other Miscellaneous Petitions for setting aside the preliminary decree as well as the final decree. It appears the execution is not stayed. The Execution Court after considering the application seeking permission to file objections, and perusing the objections ordered for issuance of delivery warrant. It has held that just because Miscellaneous Petitions filed by the Judgment Debtor/petitioner are pending, it cannot be a reason for withholding the delivery warrant.
3. I do not find any illegality and infirmity of issuance of delivery warrant. However, since the petitioner has already filed Miscellaneous Petitions under Order IX Rule 13 CPC along with the application for stay, he may request the trial Court for considering this application and the trial Court may expedite the disposal of the application.
4. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE NS