The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the writ petition challenging an order of the Additional Civil Judge allowing an execution application in a partition suit. The court held the execution court justified in proceeding based on crystallized shares and Commissioner reports. Pending IAs were also disposed of.
Writ petition dismissed; pending IAs disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
- 1 - NC: 2023:KHC-K:7691 WP NO.201519 OF 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.201519 OF 2018 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
BANDUDEV S/O MANIKRAO PATHAK AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O HULSOOR VILLAGE, BASAVAKALYAN TALUK, BIDAR DISTRICT.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by VARSHA N RASALKAR Location: High Court Of Karnataka
S/O MANIKRAO PATHAK, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE / SERVICE, R/O HULSOOR VILLAGE, BASAVAKALYAN TALUK, BIDAR DISTRICT - 585 401.
S/O MANIKRAO PATHAK, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O HULSOOR VILLAGE, BASAVAKALYAN TALUK, BIDAR DISTRICT - 585 401.
- 2 - NC: 2023:KHC-K:7691 WP NO.201519 OF 2018
OCC: STUDENT, R/O HULSOOR VILLAGE, NOW AT C/O ANRUNRAO PANDITRAO KULKARNI, NEAR GYANESHWAR MANDIR, NATH CHOWK, PANDHARPUR, SOLARPUR DISTRICT, MAHARASHTRA STATE - 413 001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SACHIN M. MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R4 AND R5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT BASAVAKALYAN DATED 09TH FEBRUARY, 2018 PASSED ON I.A.NO.I IN EX. NO.05 OF 2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-F INSOFAR AS IT PERTAINS TO RELIEF GRANTED TO DEFENDANTS 1, 4 AND 5 IS CONCERNED AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE DEFENDANTS 1, 4 AND 5 IN SAID EXECUTION PETITION; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
Heard Sri. Harshavardhan R. Malipatil, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Sachin M. Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1, 4 and 5.
dated 09th February, 2018 passed in Execution Petition No.5 of 2015 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC,
Basavakalyana, allowing IA.I. filed by the defendants 1, 4 and 5.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7691 WP NO.201519 OF 2018
In view of disposal of the main matter, pending IAs does not survive for consideration and accordingly, the same stands disposed of.
Sd/JUDGE
ARK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order allowing the execution application in Original Suit No.36 of 2002 warrants interference by the writ court.
Whether the demarcation of shares and notification by the Trial Court in execution proceedings is justified.
Bandudev S/o Manikrao Pathak
Babudev S/o Manikrao Pathak
Ramesh S/o Manikrao Pathak
Smt. Meenakshi W/o Late Sunildev Pathak
Smt. Usha W/o Waman Naik
Kiran S/o Vilasrao Kulkarni
E.S. Indiresh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
