Karnataka High Court
Smt. Jahida Khanam vs Sri. R.T. Swamy on 4 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:435
CRP No. 288 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.288 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. JAHIDA KHANAM,
D/O. VAZEER KHAN,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT BRAHMANA BEEDI,
SANTHEBENNUR, CHANNAGIRI TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-560 047.
2. SRI SYED RIYAZ AHAMED
S/O. SYED AMEER,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT BRAHMANA BEEDI,
SANTHEBENNUR, CHANNAGIRI TALUK,
DAVANGERE DISTRICT-560 047.
...PETITIONERS
Digitally (BY SRI SYED JAFFER MOHIYUDDIN, ADVOCATE)
signed by V
MANJUSHA
BAI AND:
Location:
High Court 1. SRI R.T. SWAMY
of Karnataka S/O. M. RUDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT SANTHEBENNUR VILLAGE,
CHANNAGIRI TALUK,
DAVANGERE DISTRICT-560 047.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI GOPALAKRISHNAMURTHY C., ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:435
CRP No. 288 of 2023
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE CODE, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 17.09.2022 IN I.A. NO.1/2022 UNDER ORDER XXI RULE
54 SECTION 151 OF CPC., AT ANNEXURE-A IN EX.NO.22/2019
BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., AT CHANNAGIRI TO
SECURE THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH
PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. Aggrieved by the order dated 17.09.2022 passed on
I.A.No.1 in Execution No.22/2019 by the Senior Civil Judge and
JMFC, Channagiri wherein the attachment of the petition
schedule property has been allowed by the Executing Court in
discharging of the amount payable by the petitioners to the
respondent, the present civil revision petition is filed.
2. After arguing the matter for sometime, learned counsel
for the petitioners fairly submits that if three months time is
granted from today, the petitioners would clear all the dues of
the respondent and prays that the impugned order should not
be given effect to, till such time.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that he is
interested in getting back his money and states that if the
NC: 2024:KHC:435
petitioners pay his money, he will not insist the property being
attached and sold.
4. Admittedly, respondent is the decree holder and
petitioners are the Judgment Debtors and there is no error in
the order passed by the Executing Court on I.A.No.1 in
attaching the property in discharging of the debt owed by the
petitioners herein to the respondent. However, in the light of
the undertaking given by the learned counsel for the
petitioners, it would be just, fair and reasonable that the order
passed by the Executing Court be kept in abeyance for a period
of three months facilitating the petitioners to discharge their
debt completely and in that event, the Executing petition shall
be closed, without giving effect to the order passed by the
Executing Court on I.A.No.1 and in case, the petitioners were
to fail in discharging of the debt, then in that case, the
impugned order can be given effect to by the Executing Court.
Hence, the following:
ORDER
i. The petitioners shall pay the amounts they owe to
the respondent as per the judgment and decree in
O.S.No.11/2017 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at
NC: 2024:KHC:435
Channagiri on or before 05.04.2024. In that event,
the Execution petition No.22/2019 on the file of the
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Channagiri shall be
closed as the decree having been satisfied.
ii. The order passed on I.A.No.1 in Execution petition
No.22/2019 shall be kept in abeyance till 05.04.2024.
iii. If the petitioners fail to discharge the amount as
aforesaid on or before 05.04.2024, then in that event,
the order passed on I.A.No.1 in Execution petition
No.22/2019 shall be given effect by the Executing
Court and further proceedings in Execution petition
No.22/2019 shall be continued.
iv. Civil Revision Petition is accordingly, disposed of.
v. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stands
disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VMB
