Disposed

Shaik Mastan Mehaboob Jan v. Mr T R Shekhar

Karnataka HC20 Apr 2022WP/6547/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a writ petition filed by judgment debtors challenging an order dismissing an application to recall a delivery warrant. The Court accepted an undertaking to vacate the property on or before 15.06.2022 and dismissed the writ petition without adjudicating the merits.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of by recording affidavit of undertaking to vacate property by 15.06.2022.

Shaik Mastan Mehaboob Jan Vs Mr T R Shekhar — Execution and Attachment | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶5

W.P. NO.6547 OF 2021 (GM-CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

1 . SHAIK MASTAN MEHABOOB JAN S/O LATE KHALEEL-UR-REHMAN @ MEHBOOB JAN AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT NO. 24/1-2

¶8

2 . MOHEMMAD SADATH MEHABOOB JAN

¶9

S/O LATE KHALEEL-UR-REHMAN @ MEHBOOB JAN AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

¶10

R/AT NO. 24/1-2

¶11

3 . MASOOD MEHABOOB JAN

¶12

S/O LATE KHALEEL-UR-REHMAN @ MEHBOOB JAN AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

¶13

PETITIONERS 1 TO 3 ARE R/AT NO. 24/1-2 BORE BANK ROAD, BENSON TOWN BENGALURU – 560046

¶14

PETITIONERS 1 TO 3 ARE REP. BY THEIR GPA HOLDER MR. AFZAL RAHMAN JAN AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS S/O LATE KHALEEL-UR-REHMAN @ MEHABOOB JAN NO. 24/1-2, BORE BANK ROAD, BENSON TOWN BENGALURU - 560046

¶15

¶16

...PETITIONERS

¶17

(BY SRI SURESH S LOKRE, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI SHRAVAN S LOKRE, ADVOCATE)

¶18

AND

¶19

1 . MR. T R SHEKHAR S/O LATE T RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R/AT NO. 309, 7^TH ‘A’ MAIN 1^ST BLOCK, HRBR LAYOUT KALYANAGAR BENGALURU – 560 043.

¶20

2 . MRS. T R REKHA D/O LATE RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT NO. 108, COLES ROAD, FRAZER TOWN BENGALURU – 560 005.

¶21

3 . MRS. T R NANDINI D/O LATE RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT CHANNAPPA COMPOUND KADUGONDANAHALLI ARABIC COLLEGE POST BENGALURU – 560 025

¶22

4 . MRS. MEERA SUBAIAH W/O LATE T R HARISH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT FLAT NO.6, METROPOLITAN APARTMENTS HAINES ROAD, FRAZER TOWN BENGALURU – 560005.

¶23

5 . MR. FAZLUR REHAMAN @ AMEER JAN S/O LATE M A LATHEEF AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS

¶24

¶25

6 . MR. AZEER-UR-REHMAN@ AHMED JAN S/O LATE M A LATHEEF AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

¶26

7 . MR. IMTIAZ JAN S/O LATE M A LATHEEF AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

¶27

8 . MR. RAHAMATH ABDUL LATHEEF S/O LATE M A LATHEEF AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS

¶28

9 . MR. SHAHNAWA MOHD. ABDUL LATHEEF S/OLATE M A LATHEEF AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

¶29

RESPONDENT NOS. 5 TO 9 ARE R/AT NO. 33/2, NEW NO. 33/4 ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU 560042.

¶30

AND ALSO AT NO.16 XAVIER LAYOUT, 4^TH CROSS BENGLAURU 560047

¶31

10 . MR. AFZAL REHMAN JAN S/O LATE KHALEEL-UR-REHMAN @ MEHBOOB JAN AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT NO. 24/1-2, BORE BANK ROD, BENSON TOWN BENGALURU – 560 046

¶32

11 . MR. AZHAR S/O AHMED JAN AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS

¶33

12 . MR. ASIM S/O AHMED JAN

¶34

¶35

AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

¶36

13 . MR. REHAN S/O AHMED JAN AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

¶37

RESPONDENT NOS. 11 TO 13 AE R/AT NO. 33/2, NEW NO. 34/4 ULSOORE ROAD, BENGLAURU – 560042

¶38

AND ALSO AT NO.16 XAVIER LAYOUT, 4^TH CROSS BENGALURU - 560047

¶39

....RESPONDENTS

¶40

(BY SRI SUNEEL S NARAYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO 4; NOTICE TO R5 TO 13 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶41

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.03.2021 ON I.A.NO.4 IN EX.P.NO.15135/2020 PASSED BY THE V ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXIV ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION IN I.A.NO.4

¶42

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

This Writ Petition is filed by the judgment debtors 7 to 9 in Execution Petition No.15135 of 2020, on the file of V Additional Small Causes Judge and XXIV ACMM Court of Small Causes,

¶45

¶46

Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru, challenging the order dated 22.03.2021, dismissing the application-IA.4.

¶47

Respondents 1 to 4 have initiated eviction proceedings against the defendants in SC No.15307 of 2017 and the trial Court by judgment dated 14.03.2019 allowed the petition directing the defendants 1 to 12 to quit and deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule property to the plaintiffs within thirty days from the date of the order. Thereafter, the decree holder has filed Execution Petition No.15135 of 2020. In the said execution proceedings, the Executing Court has passed the impugned order dated 22.03.2021, dismissing the application filed by the judgment debtors seeking recalling the delivery warrant.

¶48

During the course of the proceedings the petitioners herein, who are judgment debtors 7 to 9 have filed affidavit of undertaking and paragraph 1 of the affidavit reads as under:

¶49

“1. I submit that I am the General Power of Attorney holder representing the petitioners No.1, 2 and 3, and myself who is shown as respondent No.10 in the petition I submit that my brothers who are the Petitioners’ No.1, 2

¶50

¶51

and 3 and myself have been in possession of the suit schedule property and in view of the recent developments in the Contempt Petition, we have offered to voluntarily vacate and deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule property on 15^th June, 2022 without driving the plaintiffs in S.C.No.15307/2017 to seek exeuction proceedings to remove us. I submit that I am duly authorised and empowered to enter into this Affidavit binding on the Petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 3 who are my brothers and we will not sub-let or sub-lease or underlet the suit schedule property during this period.”

¶52

Heard, Sri. Shravan S. Lokre, learned Senior counsel

¶53

appearing for the petitioners. Sri. Suneel S. Narayan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 submitted that the General Power of attorney holder of judgment debtors 7 to 9– Afzal Rehman Jan, is present before the court.

¶54

Considering the fact that the parties to the proceedings, have settled the matter as the petitioners herein have agreed to vacate and deliver the vacant possession of the suit schedule property to the respondents herein on or before the 15^th June 2022, in terms of the affidavit of undertaking dated 20.04.2022, filed before the court and in that view of the

¶55

¶56

matter, the writ petition is disposed of recording the affidavit of undertaking made by the petitioners/judgment debtors 7 to 9.

¶57

Sri Suneel S. Narayan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 submitted that respondents 1 to 4 will not precipitate the matter before the Executing Court and in the contempt proceedings till 15.06.2022.

¶58

Sd/JUDGE

¶59

Shaik Mastan Mehaboob Jan v. Mr T R Shekhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik Mastan Mehaboob Jan v. Mr T R Shekhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhoovaraha Gruha Nirmana Sahakara Sangha Ltd. Vs Tirumalai B R

Shri Shekar G Vs Shri v Seetharam

S Subramaniyan Vs S Shivakumar

D v Jyothi Vs the Chief Officer

Smt Yashoda Venkatesh Vs M/S Globe Detective Agency (P) Ltd.

Sri. Omkar Nayaka Vs Sri. D. N. Erappanayaka