Dismissed

Smt. Chandrawwa W/O Annayya Saidapurmath v. Chandrappa S/O Mallappa Magadum

Karnataka HC9 Jul 2024WP/103910/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an executing court's order allowing amendment of survey number in an execution petition for specific performance. The court held no serious prejudice was caused despite revenue authority subdivision.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; order passed by executing court allowing amendment of survey number in execution petition upheld.

Smt. Chandrawwa W/O Annayya Saidapurmath Vs… — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:9478 WP No. 103910 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 103910 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

SMT. CHANDRAWWA W/O. ANNAYYA SAIDAPURMATH, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. MUDHOL, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT-587114.

¶6

SMT. PARAWWA W/O. SHANKREPPA HIREMATH, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. HOSUR, DIST: BAGALKOT-587114.

¶7

…PETITIONERS

¶8

(BY SRI. SHIVARAJ P. MUDHOL, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

CHANDRAPPA S/O. MALLAPPA MAGADUM, AGE: YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NILAJI, TQ: RAIBAG NOW AT MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT-591217.

¶11

YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR

¶12

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶13

SADASHIV S/O. MALLAPPA MAGADUM, AGE: YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NILAJI, TQ: RAIBAG NOW AT MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT-591217.

¶14

SHIVAMURTAYYA S/O. DUNDAYYA SAIDAPURMATH, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. MUDHOL, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT-587313.

¶15

GURUNANJAYYA S/O. DUNDAYYA SAIDAPURMATH, AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. MUDHOL, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT-587313.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:9478 WP No. 103910 of 2024

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05/03/2024 ON I.A. NO.XIV IN E.P.NO.05/2007 PASSED BY THE PRIL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC MUDHOL VIDE ANNEXURE-A BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION; TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN EXECUTION PETITION NO.05/2007 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRIL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC MUDHOL VIDE ANNEXURE-F BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This petition is filed by the judgment debtors assailing the order passed by the executing court on I.A.No.14 filed under order 6 Rule 17 of CPC. Respondents filed the suit for specific performance of contract. Suit is decreed and now the decree is sought to be enforced by filing E.P.No.5/2007. Pending consideration of the execution proceedings, respondents-decree holders have sought amendment of the survey number, as the original survey number has undergone hissa proceedings and therefore, amendment is sought. The said application is

¶22

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:9478 WP No. 103910 of 2024

¶23

resisted by the present petitioners on the ground that pot hissa (division) affected by the revenue authorities is confusing and therefore, the proposed amendment changes the nature of proceedings and the new survey number now sought to be recovered is not a part of original decree. Therefore, petitioners have contended that in the event petitioners’ intend to seek amendment, the original plaint and decree have to be amended. The learned Judge has declined to accept the objection raised by the petitioners. Application is allowed and decree holders are permitted to amend the survey number to enforce the decree for specific performance.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioners reiterating

¶25

the grounds would point out that under the garb of amendment, respondents-decree holders are intending to enforce a decree in respect of some other agricultural land, which was neither the subject matter of agreement to sell nor the suit.

¶26

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:9478 WP No. 103910 of 2024

¶27

This court on meticulous examination of the

¶28

objections tendered by petitioners is not inclined to accede to the grounds urged in the petition as well as objections tendered to the application. Records reveal that pursuant to direction issued by the executing court to enforce the decree, sub-division is effected and in view of sub-division, the suit property is reassigned fresh Sy.No.290/4. On meticulous examination of the order under challenge, no serious prejudice is caused to the petitioners, in view of amendment.

¶29

The writ petition being devoid of merits stands

¶30

dismissed.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

MBS Ct-mck List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54

Smt. Chandrawwa W/O Annayya Saidapurmath v. Chandrappa S/O Mallappa Magadum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Chandrawwa W/O Annayya Saidapurmath v. Chandrappa S/O Mallappa Magadum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Laxmi Narayan Traders Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Mallikarjun Cotton Company Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Bharati Mobile lLTD., Vs Shri P Venkatramana Shet S/O Late Panduranga Shet

M/S Bharti Axa General Insurance Company Limited Vs Minor B Mukesh S/O Late Babu Lal

Sri.Ayubkhan Akbarkhan Pathan Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S.M.G.Kalamani and Brothers, Vs the State of Karnataka