Mallikarjun @ Mallika v. Smt Virupakshamma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.15267/2022 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

MALLIKARJUN @ MALLIKA S/O LATE KRIYAPPA AGED 56 YEARS R/O GOPAL BHOSENHALLI VILLAGE LAKKAVALLI HOBLI -577 228 TARIKERE TALUK. …PETITIONER

(BY SRI. S.B. HALLI, ADV.,)

AND:

¶1SMT. VIRUPAKSHAMMA W/O LATE SHADAKSHARAPPA AGED 79 YEARS.

¶2SMT. PANKAJAKSHI D/O LATE SHADAKSHARAPPA AGED 54 YEARS.

¶3SMT. PARAVATHAMMA D/O LATE SHADAKSHARAPPA AGED 52 YEARS.

¶4VAGISH S/O LATE SHADAKSHARAPPA AGED 50 YEARS.

by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:41558( W.P.(No.15267/2022( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010345162022( ( (

5., SMT.,PUSHPAVATHI, D/O,LATE,SHADAKSHARAPPA, AGED,47,YEARS., ,

6., SMT.,MAHESHAWARI, D/O,LATE,SHADAKSHARAPPA, AGED,44,YEARS., ,

7., SMT.,MADHUMALATHI, D/O,LATE,SHADAKSHARAPPA, AGED,42,YEARS., , ALL,ARE,R/AT,BEGURU,VILLAGE, AJJAMPUR,HOBLI, AJJAMPURA,TQ, CHIKKAMAGALURU,DISTRICT-577,547., , …RESPONDENTS, , (BY,SRI.,RAVI,H.K.,ADV.,,FOR,R1,TO,R7), , , THIS,WRIT,PETITION,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLE,227,OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA,, PRAYING, TO, QUASH, THE, ORDER, PASSED, BY, THE, LEARNED, CIVIL, JUDGE, AND, ADDL, JMFC,, TARIKERE, IN, EX.P.NO.11/2021, ON, I.A.NO.1, DTD,

18.7.2022,PRODUCED,ANNEXURE-D,TO,THE,WRIT,PETITION,&, ETC., , , THIS,PETITION,,COMING,ON,FOR,PRELIMINARY,HEARING, IN, 'B', GROUP,, THIS, DAY,, ORDER, WAS, MADE, THEREIN, AS, UNDER:,

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

ORAL ORDER

This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated

18.07.2022 passed on I.A.No.1 in Ex.No.11/2021 on the file of the Civil Judge and Additional JMFC., Tarikere (for short, 'the Executing Court').

¶2Heard Sri.S.B.Halli, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Ravi H.K., learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 7 and perused the material available on record.

¶3Late Smt.Basamma had filed the suit in O.S.No.301/1993 against one Sri.Kariyappa and two others seeking the judgment and decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant Nos.1 to 3, their agents, servants, legal heirs, etc., from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The said suit came to be decreed vide judgment and decree dated 18.04.1996 by restraining the

defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession over the suit schedule property. The petitioner herein was the defendant No.3 in said the suit. It is to be noticed that defendant Nos.1 and 2 have not challenged the impugned order.

¶4It is to be noticed that the legal heirs of the decree holder have initiated the execution proceedings in Ex.Case No.11/2021 alleging violation of the judgment and decree of the trial Court by contending that the judgment debtors have trespassed into the suit schedule property which is in violation of the judgment and decree of injunction. Hence, they filed an application seeking a direction to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Lakkavalli Police Station to render Police help in maintaining the possession and enjoyment of the decree holder over the suit schedule property. The said application was allowed by the Executing Court under the impugned order.

¶5It is to be noticed that the respondents-decree holders are making specific assertion that in the month of June 2020 and September 2020, the judgment debtors have created galata and have abused the decree holders in filthy language and again on 01.02.2021, an attempt was made to trespass into the suit schedule property and the judgment debtors have created galata and thereafter the decree holders have approached the jurisdictional police and lodged the written complaint against the judgment debtors. However, the Police have registered the same in Non-Cognizable Register and issued an acknowledgment. The Executing Court considering the aforesaid assertion in the application, proceeded to allow the application by directing the Station House Officer, Lakkavalli Police to assist the decree holders in execution of the judgment and decree passed dated 18.04.1996 in O.S.No.301/1993.

¶6The contention of the petitioner-judgment debtor is that the execution petition is not maintainable as

the same is beyond the period of limitation and no opportunity was provided to the petitioner to file objection to the application for Police protection, has no merit consideration as the petitioner has entered appearance before the Executing Court on 09.04.2021 and the matter was adjourned to 23.08.2021 and again it was adjourned to 04.09.2021 and on the said date the petitioner could not file the objections. Admittedly, the petitioner has not filed any objections to the said application and the Executing Court, only on 18.07.2022 passed the impugned order. Nothing prevented the petitioner from filing an application seeking recall of the order dated 04.09.2021, without making any such attempt, now a ground is raised saying that no opportunity was provided to the petitioner by the Executing Court, which has no merit consideration and accordingly the petition deserves to be rejected.

¶7Another contention of the petitioner-judgment debtor that the execution petition is not maintainable is also liable to be rejected as the respondents-decree

holders have specifically pleaded that on a particular day the judgment debtors have violated the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.301/1993 and until a violation occurred, there was no occasion for the decree holders to initiate the execution proceedings. Hence, on this count also, the petition deserves to be rejected.

¶8The Executing Court, considering all the aspects, has directed the Police to render the assistance to the decree holders in execution of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.301/1993. I do not find any good grounds to interfere with the impugned order of the Execution Court in the present petition. The petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly rejected. No order as to costs.

Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

BSR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27