Altaf Ahmed vs Mohd. Ghouse Nazeem Badsha
2023 Latest Caselaw 4266 Kant

                                                -1-
                                                              NC: 2023:KHC:23991
                                                              WP No. 48488 of 2016




                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                            DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
                                             BEFORE
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
                          WRIT PETITION NO. 48488 OF 2016 (GM-CPC)
                   BETWEEN:
                        ALTAF AHMED,
                        S/O LATE HAJI MOHAMMED BASHA,
                        AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
                        R/AT NO.316, 10TH MAIN,
                        14TH CROSS, INDIRANAGAR,
                        2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560 038.

                                                                    ...PETITIONER
                   [BY SRI. SESHADRI D., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)]
                   AND:
                        MOHD. GHOUSE NAZEEM BADSHA,
                        S/O LATE MOHAMMED GHOUSE,
                        AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
                        REP. BY HIS G.P.A. HOLDER,
                        MRS. SAMEENA NAZEEM,
                        W/O MOHD. GHOUSE NAZEEM BADSHA,
                        AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
                        R/AT NO.2062, 16TH 'D' MAIN,
                        H.A.L. 2ND STAGE, INDIRANAGAR,
Digitally signed by     BENGALURU-560 038.
GEETHAKUMARI
PARLATTAYA S
Location: High Court                                               ...RESPONDENT
of Karnataka
                   [BY SRI. PRABHUGOUD TUMBAGI, ADV., FOR
                       SRI. M. RAMAKRISHNA, ADV., FOR M.T.NANAIAH ASSTS. (PH)]
                         THIS WP IS FILED UNDER 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
                   INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, DATED
                   25.8.2016 PASSED BY THE TRIAL COURT ON I.A.NO.II/2016 AND
                   I.A.NO.III/2016 IN EXECUTION NO.2506/2015 VIDE ANNEX-F & G
                   ON THE FILE OF XXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE COURT,
                   BENGALURU, ALLOW THE I.A.NO.II/2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER
                   IN EXECUTION NO.2506/2015 ON THE FILE OF XXV ADDL. CITY
                   CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE COURT, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEX-B
                   AND ETC.,
                                       -2-
                                                     NC: 2023:KHC:23991
                                                     WP No. 48488 of 2016




     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
B-GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                                     ORDER

This petition is filed challenging order dated

25.08.2016 passed by Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,

Bengaluru (CCH-23) in Ex.no.2506/2015 on I.A.no.II/2016 and

III/2016 vide Annexures - F and G respectively etc.

2. Petitioner herein was Judgment Debtor (J.Dr.)

in Ex.case no.2506/2014. On perusal of order sheet, it is seen

that there is interim order granted in this writ petition. Though

writ petition was filed in year 2016, it is further noted that

there was no representation on behalf of petitioner. Even today

when matter was passed over and called again, there was no

representation.

3. On other hand, Prabhugoud Tumbagi, learned

counsel appearing for Sri.M Ramakrishna, advocate for

petitioner submitted that petitioner/J.Dr. had challenged

preliminary decree, but, lost said challenge before this Court.

Thereafter final decree was drawn and same is not challenged.

Under impugned order passed on IA no.II for stay by petitioner

was rejected and IA no.III filed by Decree Holder (D.Hr.) for

attachment of movables was allowed.

NC: 2023:KHC:23991 WP No. 48488 of 2016

4. In view of pendency of writ petition, Execution

case has not been proceeded with. Therefore seeks for disposal

of petition.

In view of above circumstances, as there is no

appearance on behalf of petitioner, writ petition is dismissed for

non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

PSG