Sri Rajeeva Shetty Vs the Chief Secretary

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATE 02.04.2011 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.5 VIDE ANNEX-A; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 07.09.2009 ISSUED BY THE 3^RD RES. VIDE ANNEX-B AND ETC.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

After arguing the matter for sometime, learned counsel

¶29

for the petitioner submits that the only grievance the petitioner has in this petition is while the respondent No.2 had filed a suit in O.S.No.15/2010 seeking recovery of Rs.1,18,300/- with interest at the rate of 12.5% per annum which was decreed, as against which the petitioner herein had filed a regular appeal in R.A No.34/2016 which was dismissed confirming the judgment

¶30

and decree passed in the trial Court, and when the respondent No.2- Corporation has initiated the execution proceedings in

¶31

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:32723 WP No. 17352 of 2011

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

Ex.No.73/2017, there was no need or necessity for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 5 to initiate parallel proceedings invoking the provisions of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, and issuing demand notices. He further submits that the petitioner herein had deposited a sum of Rs.75,000/- before this Court which with the accrued interest now far in excess of Rs.2,00,000/-. He submits if an opportunity is granted, petitioner would seek redress of his grievance seeking calculation of amount before the Executing Court.

¶34

2. Counsel for the respondent No.2-corporation submits that they will not precipitate the matter through respondent Nos.3 to 5 and would seek their remedy in the execution proceedings, before the Executing Court.

¶35

3. Heard. Perused the records.

¶36

4. There is no dispute of the fact that a decree in O.S.

¶37

No.15/2010 has been passed against the petitioner herein directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,18,300/- with interest at the rate of 12.5% per annum. Challenge to the said decree made by the petitioner in R.A.No.34/2016 has resulted

¶38

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:32723 WP No. 17352 of 2011

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

in its dismissal. In other words, the decree for recovery of money that had been passed in favour of respondent No.2 has attained finality and is subsisting till date. Execution proceedings pertaining to the said decree is also pending consideration.

¶41

5. In that view of the matter, keeping open the

¶42

questions regarding actual dues to be paid pursuant to the decree, to be urged if any, by the petitioner in the execution proceedings in Ex.No.73/2017, petition is disposed of . The proceedings initiated by respondent Nos. 3 to 5 are quashed. Amount deposited before this Court shall be transmitted to the Executing Court, which shall after hearing the parties in the execution proceedings, if any, pass appropriate order thereafter.

¶43

SD/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

¶44

RU

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16

Sri Rajeeva Shetty v. the Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Rajeeva Shetty v. the Chief Secretary

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 Sijo Sebastian Vs State of Karnataka

Kriplani M Vs the Superintendent of Police

Sri. H.S. Parameshwar Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Padmalakshmi R P Vs the Authorized Officer/

Think and Learn Private Limited Vs Chan Zuckerberg Mauritius

Sri B P Suresh Kumar Vs M/S Fortis Hospitals