Sri Vishwanath S/O Late … vs Smt Sarasamma W/O D Srinivasa on 2 June, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 2"" DAY or JUNE, 2008

BEFORE:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.s.pAcHHAPUnEii5j»f* i

WRIT PETITION No.27581 g§iéé05«§GM-cP¢j.__*3 n

BETWEEN:

Sri. Vishwanath,

Age: 50 years, .

S/o. late Nanjegowda,'

R/o. D.No.5094,

Housing Board Colony, W" , v_ u *a Wjg=

Nanjangud Town. ii_ J ".; '.i_ .;e_7 PETITIONER/S

[By Sri. M. seen gee; A§v,} :1'

AND:

Smt. Sarasamma,.
Age: majoryg

W/o. D.SriniVasa, _
R/0. Vakkaiageri,"'

.*Nanjafi§ud_T0Wn. =»_ _____ 1- ... RESPONDENT/S

iQ[ByiM1se_B;Roopesh & M.K.Sandeep, Adv5.}

i-i-it

This Writ Petition is filed u/Articles 226 and

_i'22?*of the Constitution of India, praying to quash
'«.the, Order dt. 11.11.2005 passed in I.A. in 3.9.

.x _No;28i2o03 on the file of the Civil Judge [Jr. Dn.}
'-_énd%JMFC., Nanjangud as per Annexure~"G".

This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary

A "Hearing "B" Group, this day the Court made the

foilowing:



ORDER

This petition is filed challenging the jérder

dated 11.11.2305 allowing the appliCat.i_t’;nV’:”tfovru

attachment of the amount lying in deposit rind thefii.

Court of the Civil Judge [Sr. Dn;§,~Nanjandudl x~f;H

2. The facts relevant for the purpoee of this:°,

petition are as under:

The respondent inatituted a euit for recovery
of money in 0.59 N051555?dé¢i_ Wfithh” came to be
decreed. Thereafter. thé_reshondeht filed Execution
Petition No.é§/éfihg and éiép riied an I.A. to attach
the amount to the éitegg mentioned in the execution
petition out of Re:iGi¢0§?CO iying in deposit in the

Court of the Cifil Judge lsr. Dn.}, Nanjangud.

iA<$he irialkcourt under the impugned Order, after

iasuing inotioedfto the petitioner has allowed the

hdsaid I.A. 'and attached the amount to the extent

'":fClaimed in the execution petition. Being aggrieved

'of the_eaid Order, this petition is filed.

i3. The learned counsel for the petitioner

fl";heebmits that the Trial Court had no authority or

0L

matter, the impugned Order is illegal and has to be

set aside.

In the circumstances, I proceed to pass flthe

following:

ORDER

The petition is allowed.di iihe :Otdeii.ddte§i

11.11.2005 passed by the Coi1i:t_ is °¢;1ua._:f=’ned ‘and = L’

the matter is remitted back to the TriaiAQourt to
hear the application on merits ih the light of the

observations made and ~th¢” @§0Vi§i0fis7 of Order 21

Rule 52 C,E,C;'”:d

‘Va Ksm*’,V