Dismissed¶¶47

Sri Tajammul Pasha v. Smt Shakira Sultana

Karnataka HC16 Feb 2026WP/38772/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; WP No. 38772 of 2025 (GM-CPC); NC: 2026:KHC:9664; decided 16.02.2026 by S.R. Krishna Kumar J.; Article 227 Constitution of India; writ of certiorari; compromise decree dated 12.08.2025; S.C.No.15003/2023; Addl. Small Causes Judge, Mayohall Unit Court, Bengaluru; Annexure-D; execution proceedings Ex.No.15107/2025; V ASCJ and XXIV ACJM Bangalore; delivery warrant; interim order 07.01.2026; earlier order 23.12.2025; vacation of premises by 15.02.2026; affidavit undertaking; arrears of rent; petition dismissed; tenant-landlord dispute; Tajammul Pasha v. Shakira Sultana.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the petitioner; writ petition dismissed. Executing Court directed to continue and dispose of the execution proceedings (Ex.No.15107/2025), recording findings on all aspects including arrears of rent.

Sri Tajammul Pasha Vs Smt Shakira Sultana — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶47

Issue for consideration

Whether the compromise decree dated 12.08.2025 passed in S.C.No.15003/2023 should be set aside on the grounds urged in the writ petition. +1 more

¶¶22

Court's answer

The facts and grounds urged in the petition do not constitute valid or sufficient grounds to assail the compromise decree, which was signed by the petitioner voluntarily and out of his own free will and volition without coercion, undue influence, misrepresentation or fraud; apart from alleging hardship on vacating the premises, no legal or factual grounds were advanced.

¶¶28

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the circumstances, including the submission that the petitioner had not handed over vacant possession as directed by the Court's order dated 07.01.2026 (which had extended time), the Court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it.

¶¶47

Key takeaways

The Executing Court was directed to proceed further and dispose of the execution proceedings by recording findings on all aspects, including arrears of rent, as expeditiously as possible.ratio¶¶50

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (GM-CPC) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the tenant-petitioner seeking a writ of certiorari to set aside the compromise decree dated 12.08.2025 passed in S.C.No.15003/2023 by the Addl. Small Causes Judge, Mayohall Unit Court, Bengaluru (Annexure-D). The Court held that the grounds urged were neither valid nor sufficient: the compromise decree had been signed voluntarily, out of the petitioner's own free will, without coercion, undue influence, misrepresentation or fraud, and no legal or factual grounds were pleaded beyond alleged hardship in vacating the premises. An interim order dated 07.01.2026 had stayed execution proceedings in Ex.No.15107/2025 (V ASCJ and XXIV ACJM, Bangalore) subject to the petitioner vacating and handing over vacant possession on or before 15.02.2026 and filing an Affidavit; the respondent submitted this was not done. Finding no merit, the Court dismissed the petition and directed the Executing Court to proceed and dispose of the execution proceedings, recording findings on all aspects including arrears of rent, as expeditiously as possible.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:9664 WP No. 38772 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 38772 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI TAJAMMUL PASHA S/O ABDUL KHALIQ, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO.29, BAITHUL NOOR MANZIL, 2ND MAIN, 13TH CROSS, ANWAR LAYOUT, BENGALURU, PIN-560 045. ALSO AT AHMED COMPLEX, SHOP NO.1, SAUGHAAT TOURS INTERNATIONAL. NO.1, ARUNACHALAM MUDALIAR ROAD, CIVIL STATION, BENGALURU, - 560 051.

¶9

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. LAKSHMIKANTH K., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B SMT SHAKIRA SULTANA M W/O LATE INAYATULLA KHAN, Location: High Court of AGED MAJOR, R/AT NO.185, Karnataka 10TH CROSS, WILLIAMS TOWN, BENGALURU, -560 046 REP. BY HER SPA HOLDER SRI. ADNAN KHAN S/O LATE A. INAYATULLA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.11, ELEGANT DAVIS, DAVIS ROAD, RICHARDS TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 084

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA A., ADVOCATE)

¶14

¶15

NC: 2026:KHC:9664 WP No. 38772 of 2025

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SETTING ASIDE THE COMPROMISE DECREE DTD 12.08.2025 PASSED IN SC NO. 15003/2023 BY THE HONBLE COURT OF ADDL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE MAYOHALL UNIT COURT BENGALURU AT ANNEXURE-D.

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶22

a. Issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ by setting aside the compromise decree dated 12.08.2025 passed in S.C.No.15003/2023 by the Hon'ble Court of Addl, Small causes Judge, Mayohall Unit Court Bengaluru at ANNEXURE - D.

¶23

b. PASS any appropriate order or orders as this Hon'ble Court the deems fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of this case.

¶24

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

¶25

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned compromise decree dated 12.08.2025 passed in S.C.No.15003/2023. In this context, a perusal of the facts and grounds urged in the petition will clearly

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:9664 WP No. 38772 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

indicate the same do not constitute valid or sufficient grounds which enable the petitioner to assail the compromise decree which had been signed by the petitioner voluntarily and out of his own free will and volition without any coercion, undue influence, misrepresentation or fraud being practiced upon him. In fact, except stating that vacating the suit schedule premises would cause hardship to him, the compromise decree is not assailed by putting forth any legal or factual grounds. In addition thereto, in order to show some indulgence in favour of the petitioner, this Court passed the following interim order on 07.01.2026:

¶29

“Though, this Court vide order dated 23.12.2025 directed issuance of notice to the respondent, the petitioner has moved the matter to this date on the ground that the Executing court has issued delivery warrant against the petitioner and as such, there is an urgency in the matter.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the petitioner would file an Affidavit unconditionally adhere to the terms and conditions of the compromise decree dated 12.08.2025 and also to quit and deliver vacant possession of the schedule premises to the respondent on or before 15.02.2026 and in the meanwhile, all further proceedings in Ex.No.15107/2025 may be kept in abeyance. The said submission is placed on record.

¶31

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:9664 WP No. 38772 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

Issue emergent notice to the respondent

¶34

returnable by 23.01.2026.

¶35

In the meanwhile, all further proceedings in Ex.No.15107/2025 pending on the file of V ASCJ and XXIV ACJM, Bangalore, are hereby stayed, subject to the petitioner vacating and handing over vacant possession of the schedule premises to the respondent on or before 15.02.2026 and filing an Affidavit in this regard within a period of one week from today.

¶36

Re-list on 23.01.2026.

¶37

Liberty is reserved in favour of respondents to

¶38

seek vacation / modification of this order.

¶39

Hand delivery of this order is permitted.”

¶40

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the

¶41

petitioner has not vacated and handed over vacant possession of the suit schedule premises to the respondent even till today.

¶42

Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that two shops have been handed over to the respondent.

¶43

Be that as it may, having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent that the petitioner has not handed over vacant possession of the suit schedule premises as directed by this Court in its Order dated 07.01.2026, which in turn extended the

¶44

¶45

NC: 2026:KHC:9664 WP No. 38772 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

time granted in favour of the petitioner, I do not find any merit in the present petition and the same is accordingly dismissed .

¶48