Karnataka High Court
K C Ravishanka vs M/S Indian Bank on 3 November, 2025
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:44145
WP No. 11156 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 11156 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. K.C. RAVISHANKA
S/O LATE K.C. IYYA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS.
2. MR. K.C. NEELAKANTA
S/O LATE K.C. IYYA
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS.
3. MRS. UMA IYYA
D/O LATE K.C. IYYA
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS.
4. MRS. RAMA
W/O S.R. CHANDRASHEKHAR
D/O LATE K.C. IYYA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT PROPERTY
BEARING NO.44
Digitally signed MUNICIPAL KHATHA NO.20
by NANDINI M 9TH MAIN ROAD RAJAMHAL VILLAS
S BENGALURU - 560 080.
Location: HIGH ...PETITIONERS
COURT OF
KARNATAKA (BY SRI R.P. SOMASHEKHARAIAH, ADV.)
AND:
1. M/S INDIAN BANK
ULSOOR BRANCH
NO. 55/3, CAR STREET
ULSOOR, BENGALURU - 560 008
REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSIGNEE
SRI M.R. RAJATH
S/O LATE M RAMACHANDAR
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:44145
WP No. 11156 of 2024
HC-KAR
R/AT NO. 43, 45TH CROSS
RMV EXTENSION, BENGALURU - 560 003.
SRI K. ARMUGAM
S/O KUPPUSWAMY MUDALIAR,
SINE DEAD BY LRS
2. SMT UMADEVI
D/O K ARMUGAM
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
PARTNER M/S K. ARMUGAM AND CO.
NO. 2857, 13TH MAIN, E BLOCK,
RAJAJINAGAR, 2ND STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 010.
3. SRI AKTHAR HUSSAIN
S/O SRI MOHAMMED PEARAN
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
PARTNER M/S K ARUMUGAM AND CO
NO.20, CHINMAYA MISSION HOSPITAL ROAD
INDIRANAGAR, 2ND STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 038.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTILCE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD.
02/03/2020 MADE ON IA NO. 1 IN EXECUTION NO. 445/2020, ON
THE FILE OF THE CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU
(CCH-44) UNDER ANNEXURE-Q QUASH THE EXECUTION
PROCEEDINGS IN EXECUTION NO. 445/2020, ON THE FILE OF THE
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-44) UNDER
ANNEXURE-P.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
1. Judgment Debtor Nos.6 to 9 are before this Court in this
writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,
seeking for the following reliefs:-
NC: 2025:KHC:44145
HC-KAR
"1. To issue writ in the nature of certiorari and
quash the order dtd.02.03.202 made in IA No.1 in
Execution No.445/2020, on the file the city Civil and
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-44) under
Annexure -Q.
2. To issue writ in the nature of certiorari and quash
the Execution proceedings in Execution
no.445/2020, on the file of the city Civil and
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-44) under
Annexure - P.
3. Issue such other order or direction as may be
deemed fit to grant in the circumstances of the case
in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits the an order
of ad-interim injunction has been passed by the Executing
Court in Execution Case No.445/2020 on IA No.1 filed in the
said case by the decree holders. Objections have been filed by
judgment debtor Nos.7 and 8 to the said application. A
separate statement of objections with regard to the
maintainability of the execution case as against the judgment
debtor Nos.7 and 8 is also filed. Till date, no orders have been
NC: 2025:KHC:44145
HC-KAR
passed by the executing court on the same and it is under
these circumstances, the petitioners are before this Court.
4. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that
Execution Case No.445/2020 is filed by respondent No.1 -
Bank, who is the decree holder in OA No.1198/1995 passed by
the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru for recovery of
Rs.65,54,99,390/- and for sale of mortgaged property
described in the schedule by way of auction. In the said
proceedings, judgment debtor Nos.7 and 8 have filed their
statement of objections with prayer to close the execution
proceedings as against them. The said statement of objections
appears to have been filed on 01.06.2023. It appears that the
decree holder has filed IA No.1 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and
Rule 2 of CPC with a prayer to direct the judgment debtors not
to alienate the suit schedule property which is mortgaged in
favour of the decree holder. The Executing Court has passed an
ad-interim order of temporary injunction on the said application
on 03.03.2020. The judgment debtor Nos.7 and 8 have filed a
memo with a prayer to permit them to adopt their statement of
objections filed to the main petition as objections to IA No.1. It
NC: 2025:KHC:44145
HC-KAR
is the grievance of learned counsel for the petitioner that no
orders have been passed with regard to the maintainability of
the Execution Case as against judgment debtor Nos.7 and 8
though they have specifically raised a plea with regard to the
same in their statement of objections, which was filed on
01.06.2023 and no orders have been also passed on IA No.1,
disposing off the said application finally.
5. The order of ad-interim injunction appears to have been
passed on IA No.1 in Execution Case No.445/2020 on
03.03.2020. Judgment debtor Nos.7 and 8, who have filed
statement of objections to the main petition on 01.06.2023
have also filed a memo on the very same date seeking
permission of the Court to permit them to adopt their
statement of objections to the main petition as objections to IA
No.1. However, Trial Court has failed to appreciate this aspect
of the matter and no final orders have been passed IA No.1
filed in Execution Case No.445/2020 under Order XXXIX Rule 1
and Rule 2 of CPC. It is also the grievance of judgment debtor
Nos.7 and 8 that in their statement of objections dated
01.06.2023, they have raised a plea of maintainability of the
NC: 2025:KHC:44145
HC-KAR
Execution Case as against them and no orders have been
passed on the same. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed
off directing the Executing Court to consider the question of
maintainability of the Execution Case as against judgment
debtor Nos.7 and 8 allegedly raised by them in their statement
of objections filed and also to consider IA No.1 on its merits
and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as
expeditiously as possible, but not later than a period of four
months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
DN
