Karnataka High Court
Mr K Pathappa Reddy vs Sri B Thippaswamy Dead By Lrs on 6 January, 2021
Author: Krishna S.Dixit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO.11497 OF 2017 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
MR K PATHAPPA REDDY
S/O. KAPPADI THIMMAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. CHIKKAHALLY VILLAGE,
THALAKU HOBLI,
CHALLAKERE TALUK 577522,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI P MAHESHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI B THIPPASWAMY DEAD BY LRS
1. NIRMALAMMA
W/O LATE. B THIPESWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
2 . MANJUNATHA
S/O LATE. B THIPESWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,
(DIED, NO LRS ON 22.01.2017;
AMENDED V.C.O DATED 25.03.2019)
3 . VARUNA
S/O LATE. B THIPESWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS,
4 . HANUMAKKA
W/O. BASAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
5 . BASAPPA @ MUKKANNA
S/O. HANUMANTHAPA,
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS,
2
(DIED, LEAVING R1, R3 & R4 ARE HIS LEGAL HEIRS.
AMENDED V.C.O DATED 25.03.2019)
6 . B KRISHNAREDDY
S/O. BASAPPA @ MUKKANNA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
7 . B THIPPAMMA
W/O. LAKSHMANA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
ALL ARE AGRICULTURIST AND
R/O. CHIKKAHALLI VILLAGE,
CHALLAKERE TALUK 577522,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
8 . GOWRAMMA
W/O. CHANDRANNA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
9 . B SUMA
W/O. RAVEESHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
BOTH ARE AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. BODAREDDY HALLI VILLAGE,
CHALLAKERE TALUK 577522,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B M SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR
R1, R4, R6-R9;
R3 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED;
R2 DECEASED AND NO LRS;
V/O DATED 25.03.2019, R1, R3 & R4 ARE TREATED
AS LR'S OF DECEASED R5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS; QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE
LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC CHALLAKERE IN EX
PET NO.18/2015 DTD2.3.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-K
AND ETC.
3
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner being the judgment debtor in Execution
No.18/2015, is knocking at the doors of writ court for
assailing the order dated 2.3.2017, a copy whereof is at
Annexure-K whereby learned Sr. Civil Judge, Challakere has
directed the bailiff to assist the Court Commissioner in
identifying the property comprised in the counter claim of the
respondents that has been decreed.
2. After service of notice, contesting respondents
having entered appearance through their counsel, resist the
writ petition making submission in justification of the
impugned order and the reasons on which it has been
structured.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines to
grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as there is
absolutely no legally cognizable prejudice occasioned by the
impugned order justifying interference in writ jurisdiction.
4. It has been a settled position of law that the court
exercising limited supervisory jurisdiction u/a 227 of the
Constitution of India shall not interfere even when the order
is not lawful, if the same has brought about a just result as
has happened in this case; what prejudice would be caused to
the petitioner if the bailiff assists the Court Commissioner in
identifying the land in question remains to be an inscrutable
mystery.
5. The suit is of the year 2006 and the decree was
entered on 27.9.2012 in favour of respondents who had filed
the counter claim; petitioner's challenge to the said decree
was negatived in two appeals in R.A.Nos.76/2011 & 77/2011
on 6.2.2014; even petitioner's R.S.A.Nos.497/2014 &
685/2014 were also dismissed on 10.7.2014; despite all that,
petitioner appears relentlessly trying to workout some ease
one or the other way; this is not a happy thing to happen in
judicial process.
In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is
dismissed with a cost of Rs.25,000/-; the learned Judge of
the Executing Court is requested to accomplish the execution
before the onset of Summer Vacation, 2021, if necessary by
invoking the State Power and report compliance to the
Registrar General of this Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE
cbc
