Praveen Vs B Dilip Sharavanan

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDER VIDE ANNEXURE-C DTD 06.01.2024, PASSED BY THE LEARNED XXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE, (CCH-30) IN E.X.NO.552/2022, IN I.A.NO.1, FILED BY THE R1, UNDER ORDER XXI RULE 95 R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC FOR ISSUE OF DELIVERY WARRANT, AND ALLOW THE SAID I.A.NO.1 AS PRAYED FOR THEREIN.

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

The judgment debtor No.3 is before this Court in this

¶28

writ petition filed under article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set aside the order dated 06.01.2024 passed in Ex.No.552/2022 by the Court of XXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.

¶29

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶30

Respondent No.1 herein has filed

¶31

Ex.No.552/2022 before the Court of XXIX Additional City

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:49865 WP No. 1608 of 2024

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru to execute the decree of specific performance passed in O.S.No.8438/2015 dated 11.11.2020. In the execution proceedings through the process of Court sale deed was executed in favor of the decree holder. Thereafter, I.A.No.1 was filed by the decree holder in the execution proceedings to issue delivery warrant in respect of the suit schedule property. Petitioner herein had sought time on 06.01.2024 to file objections to the said application and the same was rejected by the executing Court. Being aggrieved by the said order petitioner is before this Court.

¶35

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that after the sale deed was executed in respect of the suit schedule property in favor of the decree holder through the process of Court, I.A.No.1 was filed by the decree holder in execution proceedings on 03.06.2023, with a prayer to issue delivery warrant in respect of the suit schedule property. The executing Court had thereafter adjourned the matter three time to enable the judgment

¶36

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:49865 WP No. 1608 of 2024

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

debtor to file objections to I.A.No.1. Inspite of the same, the judgment debtor had not filed objections to I.A.No.1 and on 06.01.2024, a further request was made on behalf of the judgment debtor to grant further time to file objections to I.A.No.1 and the Trial Court vide the impugned order has rejected the said prayer made of the judgment debtor. Though this Court does not find any illegality or irregularity in the order impugned dated 06.01.2024 passed by the Trial Court, by way of indulgence I am inclined to grant a final opportunity to the petitioner herein to file objections to I.A.No.1. It is made

¶39

clear that in the event, petitioner does not file his objections within the time granted by this Court, the Trial Court shall proceed further in accordance with law and pass appropriate order on I.A.No.1. Accordingly, the following:

¶40

ORDER

¶41

(i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:49865 WP No. 1608 of 2024

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

(ii) The impugned order dated

¶45

06.01.2024 passed in Ex.No.552/2022 by the

¶46

Court of XXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.

¶47

(iii) Petitioner is permitted to file his objection to I.A.No.1 in Ex.No.552/2022 before the executing Court on or before the next date of hearing before the Trial Court i.e., 11.12.2025. The Trial Court is directed to dispose off I.A.No.1 on merits within a period of one month from the next date of hearing.

¶48

In view of disposal of the petition I.A.No.1/2025 does not survive for consideration.

¶49

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶50

KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

Praveen v. B Dilip Sharavanan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen v. B Dilip Sharavanan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Rokkappa Gowda. R Aliais @ Babu. R (Babu) Vs Smt. Kalpana. R

Kumara @ Kumaraswamy Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Narasamma Vs Sri M v Satishkumar

Sri.Puttaswamy Vs Smt.N.M.Rathna

Sathyavathi Vs Kashinath Rao

Bharatha Rathna Dr B R Ambedkar Socio Economic Culture Center Vs Smt Kalpana Govindaraj