Allowed

H T Nagareddy S/O Late Hosakote Thimmappa v. the Superintendent of Police

Karnataka HC20 Sept 2024WP/105455/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Decree holder sought mandamus against the Superintendent of Police for failing to provide police protection to execute delivery warrants despite the Executing Court's directions. The Court directed compliance within 15 days and a report from the AAG.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus directing SP, Ballari to comply with intimation No.1064/2024 within 15 days; AAG to file implementation report.

H T Nagareddy S/O Late Hosakote Thimmappa Vs the… — Execution and Attachment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13425 WP No. 105455 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH WRIT PETITION NO. 105455 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

H.T. NAGAREDDY, S/O. LATE HOSAKOTE THIMMAPPA, AGE: 63 YEARS, R/O. J.B. HALLI VILLAGE-577540, MOLAKALMURU TALUKA, DIST: CHITRADURGA.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. V.M. SHEELVANT, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶10

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BALLARI-583101.

¶11

…RESPONDENT

¶12

(BY SRI. GANGADHAR J.M., AAG ALONG WITH SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA)

¶13

SAROJA HANGARAKI

¶14

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARANTAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTION ISSUED IN INTIMATION BEARING NO.1064/2024 DT 29/5/2024 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E BY THE SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., AT KUDLIGI, SITTING AT SANDUR IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶16

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13425 WP No. 105455 of 2024

¶18

ORAL ORDER

¶19

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH)

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶21

learned AAG for the respondent.

¶22

The present petition is filed praying this Court to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent to comply with the direction issued in intimation bearing No.1064/2024 dated 29.05.2024, produced at Annexure-E by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Kudligi sitting at Sandur and grant such other relief as deems fit in the circumstance of the case.

¶23

The factual matrix of the case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of Survey No.321/A2 measuring 5 acres 39 cents and Survey No.321/A3 measuring 3 acres 55 cents and he filed several suits for declaration, possession and mandatory injunction before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Kudligi sitting at Sandur. The suits were decreed on 28.02.2023 and also on 01.03.2023. The

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13425 WP No. 105455 of 2024

¶25

petitioner filed various execution petitions to execute the decree. The Executing Court issued delivery warrant on 16.09.2023. The respondent was directed to give protection for execution of delivery warrant on 06.04.2024. The intimation was also sent to the respondent along with list of execution petitions on 29.05.2024. The petitioner made several representations

¶26

to implement the order of the Court but till today the respondent has failed to comply with the same and hence the present writ petition is filed before this Court.

¶27

The grounds which have been urged by filing Annexure-A to E are that the petitioner has every statutory right to demand the implementation of lawful order of the Court and further, the respondent is under statutory obligation to comply with order of the Court. In spite of the order of the Court, the respondent has not obeyed the order of the Court and she has no regards to the order of the Court and expressing that she has got pressure from the higher-ups. The conduct of the

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13425 WP No. 105455 of 2024

¶29

respondent clearly shows that there is no regards to the order of the Court.

¶30

5. The petitioner submits that persons encroached

¶31

the land of petitioner were granted free house sites and they have constructed houses and given it for rents and all these facts are also proved by the petitioner in the suits filed by him and when the delivery warrant was issued to break open the lock and take possession was passed on 06.04.2024 itself with the intimation to the police as per Annexure-E, till today they have not given any protection to implement the order and when there is a direction to the respondent police to provide protection to implement the Court order, the same has not been extended.

¶32

6. Per contra, the learned AAG for the respondent

¶33

would submit that against the judgment and decree an appeal is filed, but admits that there is no any stay and also does not dispute the order passed by the Trial Court directing them to provide police assistance to execute the warrant.

¶34

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13425 WP No. 105455 of 2024

¶35

The counsel appearing for the petitioner also

¶36

brought to notice of this Court the endorsement made by the Court bailiff who went to implement the order of the Court where reference is made that the ‘JDRs are not willing to vacate the premises as there is instructions by the local MLA and they refused to even receive the execution warrant’ and copy of Annexure-D is also placed before this Court to evidence the said fact.

¶37

He also brought to the notice of this Court the order passed by the Trial Court in Execution No.70/2023. The Trial Court while issuing the delivery warrant also specifically directed the police authority making an observation that as per the submission of the decree holder and also the endorsement of the Court bailiff and judgment debtors are very influential persons and also local political leaders are involved in this case and also prayer is sought without the aid of the police, possession

¶38

of delivery warrant cannot be executed effectively. Further, there is no stay order against the judgment and

¶39

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13425 WP No. 105455 of 2024

¶40

decree passed by the Court and this Court being the Executing Court has no other option to execute the decree passed in the suit. Having made the said observation, allowed the application, when the I.A. was filed under Order XXI Rule 36 read with Section 151 of CPC and directed bailiff to affix the possession delivery warrant in the conspicuous places in the locality and also even the Trial Court has taken care of affixing the delivery warrant by the Court bailiff and directing to remove the valuable things which are kept in the schedule properties by the judgment debtors and directed them to hand over the possession of the schedule property to the decree holder within 15 days.

¶41

The order of the Trial Court is also very clear

¶42

that on failure to lift the valuable things by the judgment debtors is in the suit schedule property, the Court bailiff is directed to break open the lock put to the schedule property with the aid/assistance of the police within 48 hours after giving sufficient time of 15 days to the

¶43

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13425 WP No. 105455 of 2024

¶44

judgment debtors and directed to hand over the possession of the schedule property to the decree holder. The order of the Trial Court is also very clear that Superintendent of Police, Ballari is hereby directed to look after the execution of the possession delivery warrant by the Court bailiff. The Court bailiff is also further directed while executing the possession delivery warrant he is directed to take the inventories by drawing detail panchanama, photographs and videography at the cost of the decree holder and report the same to the Court and if any valuable things were found in the suit schedule property, the bailiff is directed to hand over the said valuables or things to the judgment debtors or if he is available at the time of execution of the possession delivery warrant and if he failed to receive the same, hand over the said valuable properties before the Court with a detailed report. With this direction delivery warrant was issued on 06.04.2024 itself.

¶45

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13425 WP No. 105455 of 2024

¶46

The counsel appearing for the petitioner also brought a notice of this Court that even more than four months have been elapsed and a specific direction was given to the Superintendent of Police to look after the execution of the possession delivery warrant by the Court bailiff and they are not extending any police protection and assistance. When the Court order is very specific to the Superintendent of Police directing to look after the execution of the possession delivery warrant for a period of four months, they have not extended any assistance and also not showing any respect to the order of the Court in implementing the judgment and decree of the Court.

¶47

Hence, it appears that the Superintendant of Police is not having any respect to the Court order in not extending the protection as well as the direction to look after the execution of the possession delivery warrant in spite of order was passed long back and also not complied the order. When such being the case, the respondent –

¶48

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13425 WP No. 105455 of 2024

¶49

Superintendent of Police is directed to implement the Court order forthwith.

¶50

The contention of the learned AAG that there are so many people in the said premises and rehabilitation has to be made cannot be accepted. That is not the lookout of the Superintendent of Police to make rehabilitation and only the duty of the Superintendent of Police is that he has to do statutory duty to implement the Court order and only to obey the Court order and hence it is a fit case to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or directing the respondent - Superintendent of Police to comply with the direction issued in intimation bearing No.1064/2024 dated 29.05.2024 at Annexure-E and give effect to the direction of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Kudligi sitting at Sandur within a span of 15 days from today.

¶51

The learned AAG is also directed to file a report regarding implementing the Court order passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kudligi sitting at Sandur

¶52

NC: 2024:KHC-D:13425 WP No. 105455 of 2024

¶53

10 -

¶54

immediately after 15 days. To report compliance, list this

¶55

matter on 14.10.2024.

¶56

Sd/(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

¶57

SH CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18

H T Nagareddy S/O Late Hosakote Thimmappa v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H T Nagareddy S/O Late Hosakote Thimmappa v. the Superintendent of Police

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

Umesh S/O Shivaputrappa Angadi Vs Chief Managing Director

Smt. Gulshanbanu W/O Samiulla Ansari Vs Zarinabi W/O Moulali Bhatkal Since Deceased Petitioner and Defendant No. 1 to 3 Are Her Lrs

Mr Ramakant Krishnaji Deshpande Vs Laxmi Laxminarayan Dempo

M/S Shri Veerabhadreshwar Agency Inamdyamanakoppa Vs the State of Karnataka

Prashanth Alias Prakash S/O. Fakiresh Harijan Vs the State of Karnataka

Ranjit S/O Savarappa Chalavadi Vs Narahari S/O Shyamanna Kalal