Sri Manjunatha Reddy vs Smt Gopamma
2025 Latest Caselaw 4158 Kant

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 4158 Kant
Judgement Date : 19 February, 2025

Karnataka High Court

Sri Manjunatha Reddy vs Smt Gopamma on 19 February, 2025

Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad

Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad

                                             -1-
                                                    NC: 2025:KHC:7479
                                                   WP No. 594 of 2025




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                     DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

                                       BEFORE
                 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
                      WRIT PETITION NO. 594 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
                BETWEEN:

                SRI MANJUNATHA REDDY
                PROPRIETOR
                AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
                S/O PAPA REDDY
                M/S. VINTAGE PROPERTIES
                NO.14, 1ST FLOOR, 14TH MAIN
                HSR V SECTOR, OPP. AGARA LAKE
                BENGALURU-560 034.
                                                        ...PETITIONER
                (BY SRI. SURESH LOKRE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
                SRI. SHRAVAN S LOKRE.,ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by AND:
HEMALATHA A
Location: HIGH      1. SMT GOPAMMA
COURT OF
KARNATAKA              W/O LATE D NANJAPPA
                     AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

                2.   SRI. D. VENKATESH
                     S/O. LATE DYAPAIAH
                     AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

                3.   SRI MANJUNATH
                     S/O LATE D NANJAPPA
                     AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
                              -2-
                                         NC: 2025:KHC:7479
                                        WP No. 594 of 2025




    ALL ARE RESIDING AT
    IGGALURU VILLAGE
    ATTIBELE HOBLI,
    ANEKAL TALUK
    BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-560 099
                                     ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. LEELADHAR H P., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS AND ALLOW THE ABOVE WRIT PETITION & SET
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED:25.10.2024 PASSED
UNDER I.A.NO.3 BY THE LXXXIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, COMMERCIAL COURT, BENGALURU IN
COMM.EX.NO.170/2023 (CCH-85) VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND
ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD


                     ORAL ORDER

This writ petition is filed by the judgment debtor under

Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the

order dated 25.10.2024 passed on IA No.3 in

Com.Ex.No.170/2023 by the LXXXIV Additional City Civil

and Sessions Judge (CCH-85), Bengaluru. In addition, a

prayer is also sought for a direction to restore the

NC: 2025:KHC:7479

registered Joint Development Agreement (for short, 'JDA')

dated 07.05.2007.

2. The respondents/decree-holders have filed

Execution Petition in Com.Ex.No.170/2023 seeking for

execution of the arbitral award in A.C.No.72/2021

disposed of on 13.12.2021. The Executing Court issued

notice to the judgment debtor. Since notice was not

served, the decree-holders filed a memo before the

executing court that hand-summons has been served on

the judgment debtor. Also on the basis of the paper

publication taken by the decree-holder, the Executing

Court has taken service of notice to judgment debtor as

sufficient. Thereafter, the decree-holders filed an

application under Order XXVI Rule 9 of CPC for

appointment of a Court Commissioner to execute the

registered cancellation of JDA by the decree-holders in

favour of the judgment debtor dated 07.05.2007.

3. Sri Suresh S.Lokre, the leaned Senior Counsel for

the petitioner/judgment debtor submits that only after the

NC: 2025:KHC:7479

cancellation of the JDA, he came to know about the order

passed by the Executing Court. Immediately, thereafter,

he approached this Court by filing this writ petition and

also filed an application for recalling the ex-parte order.

4. He further contended that, on the basis of the

cancellation of JDA, the decree-holders are alienating the

property to third parties and changing the nature of the

property. During the pendency of the Execution Petition, if

the party creates third party interest, it will affect the

rights of both the decree-holders and also judgment

debtor. However, the Executing Court has already

appointed a Court Commissioner and the Court

Commissioner has executed the order and cancelled the

JDA executed by the decree-holders in favour of the

judgment debtor dated 07.05.2007 and that the executing

court has already recalled the ex-parte order and

permitted the judgment debtor to appear before the

Executing Court. Since the Executing Court has to decide

the matter after hearing both the parties, the only relief

NC: 2025:KHC:7479

that can be granted is to direct the executing court to pass

appropriate orders, after hearing both the parties.

5. Accordingly, the following order is passed:

(i) The writ petition is disposed of.

(ii) The Executing Court is directed to give

opportunity to both the parties to file

objections, if any, and after hearing both the

parties, to pass appropriate orders, in

accordance with law.

(iii) In case, if the Executing Court dismisses the

execution petition, then the executing court is

directed to appoint a Commissioner for

setting aside the cancellation of the JDA and

restore the JDA.

(iv) In case, if the Executing Court allows the

Execution Petition, the cancellation of the JDA

stands.

(v) Till disposal of the Execution petition, both

the parties are directed not to create any

NC: 2025:KHC:7479

third party interest, in respect of the suit

schedule properties.