The Karnataka High Court dismissed a writ petition filed to quash an order dismissing an execution petition. The Court held that nothing survived in the petition as petitioners failed to deposit the mandated 25% of the settlement amount under a stay order.
The writ petition was dismissed.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:14961 WP No. 6143 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.6143 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNERS MR. MOHAN R. AND MR. PRAVEEN M.
Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: High Court of Karnataka
PETITIONERS NO. 2 & 3 OFFICE AT NO.326, 5TH MAIN, 10TH CROSS ,4TH STAGE, VINAYAKA LAYOUT, NAGARABHAVI, BENGALURU - 560 072.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. CHETHAN KUMAR K., ADVOCATE)
NC: 2024:KHC:14961 WP No. 6143 of 2024
AND:
SMT. R ANURADHA @ ANURADHA RAMES W/O R RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.23 HIG A SECTOR, 2ND MAIN ROAD, YALAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560064 REPRESENTED BY HER SPA HOLDER AND HUSBAND SRI RAMESH R.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K.K. VASANTH, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.02.2024 PASSED ON THE JURISDICTION IN COM.EX.588/2023 PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED LXXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (CCH-86) VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISSED THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is directed against the impugned order dated 03.02.2024 passed in Ex.588/2023 on the file of LXXXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore. When the matter was posted before this Court on 11.03.2024, the following order was passed:
“Issue emergent notice to the respondent returnable by 15th April 2024.
In the meanwhile, further proceedings in Com.Ex.Petition No.588/2023 pending on the file of the LXXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-86), are stayed subject to petitioners depositing 25% of the amount covered under the settlement entered into between the petitioners and respondent before the District Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru Urban. The amount shall be deposited before the Executing Court on or before 10th April 2024.
Liberty is reserved in favour of respondent to seek vacation/modification of this Order.
Two weeks’ time is granted to comply with the office objections.”
interference of this Court in exercise of its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, as held by the Apex Court in the case of Radhey Shyam Vs. Chhabi Nath reported in ( 2015) 5 SCC 423, I do not find any merit in the petition and the same is hereby
dismissed .
Sd/JUDGE
DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22
2 issues framed by the court
Whether this Court has jurisdiction to interfere with the impugned order dated 03.02.2024 dismissing the execution petition under Article 227.
Whether the petitioners have complied with the directions issued by this Court regarding the deposit of 25% of the settlement amount.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Radhey Shyam Vs. Chhabi NathApplied¶31
(2015) 5 SCC 423 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s Tirumala Constructions
Mr. Mohan R
Mr. Praveen Mohan
Smt. R Anuradha
S.R. Krishna Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
