High Court Karnataka High Court

Kamala vs Koggu Naik on 22 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Kamala vs Koggu Naik on 22 September, 2010
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 22"" DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2010f,

BEFORE

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPAL';?$_:"GQWVL§'A  O"
WRIT PETITION NO.18338/V2010    

BETWEEN:

NARAYANA NAEKA DEAD BY LR.S 

1

KAMALA   _  V'
W/O.LATE NARAvANA.__NA1:<A ' 

AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS.'   V
NO.l~5, MUNDAJE HOUSE  *
BALNADU VILLAGE &~PQST ' -
PUTTUR  _,     
D.:L_JTTUR TALUK,
.D.+<,DISTR1cT.

A' '  DTNESHA

 S/O.LATE NARAYANA NAIKA

' AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

NO.1*S MUNDAJE HOUSE,



[\.)

BALNADU VILLAGE AND POST
PUTTUR TALUK,
D.K. DISTRICT.

3 LATHA
D/O.LATE NARAYANA NAIKA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
NO.1--5 MUNDAIE HOUSE, H
BALNADU VILLAGE AND POST) " '
PUTTUR TALUK, 

D. KDISTRICT. *  - . I   I

  _ .. .E?rTAITvI_0NE;RS'

(BY SR1GRAVISHANKARSHASTR':f_FORV' . '-  

SRI GBALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, 'A.D_\I's,)

AND:

KOGGU NAIK -- _ .
S/O.LATE KITTU NAIK  *

AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS 
R/O.MUNDA3'E--.fjfOi;:'SE . ' _   '
BALAND VIL:.'LAG_E, 'RLn.fTuR,j0TfALu__I<',i_  
D.:<.DIsTRIcT.   '   ._  

  "    _ --  RESPONDENT

(BY sRI…AB.v.’KRIsNN-;A,TADv.,I)”‘—- _ ‘

THIs_wRIT”‘RETIT-ION Is FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND .227 OF VT’HE.’–cOvNs’I’uTuTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASHV THE ORDER DATED 02.06.2010 ON IA NO III IN

EXELCUTI.ON..Y’CASE F\iC’.'”O7.2005 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE

‘(S«R.’ DNT8; _AD_DITIONAL C J M, PUTTUR, D.K. CERTIFIED COPY

IOF’W.HI’CH”I»S»PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE A AND CONSEQUENTLY
‘—IAn.NO’CII-I I13-,|;i-_.O’WED AS PRAYED FOR.

THISRETHITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING

I . THIS’ DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING.

QRDER

Respondent / decree holder has instituted E.P. 7/05

‘s
E

-‘-against the petitioners / legal representigves of the

/if

judgment debtor. The petitioners filed I.A.3 in E.P. 7/05 to

stay further proceedings tili adjudication of

pending on the file of the Pri. Civil 3udge

Puttur. The decree hoider opposed

The Court being convinced that the .reigifefu’-p.r:ayed”i~h:….1.A;V3é

cannot be granted, has dismi_ssed'”the sarnefiv.This_:§wVrit.:’:i»

petition is directed against theivisaid oggrdeiz”

2. Indisputedi’y_,,.V:.” _the ;pue”t.ijtio>ner_s have filed
0.5.66/O6 wherein thwiaeqe so.u’g_h”t..for;Tcanceilation of the
judgment 4.a§i’id .2u’3′;’iV’1.01 passed in
O.S.51.,”2*Ov0.C5;”i;n tiayouf-‘.Vof.’the””i’e–s’pondent herein. In the
said sugar, petirtiehegi-is:dha§}e..fi’iedi1.A.e on 3.2.10, to stay the

operation xi’-and Vexecution of the decree passed in

b§””bri.ngirng to the notice of the Court that,

the’ .deFenda«nt”i..n the suit has instituted E.P.7/O5 and the

decree i«i”i”<.j_c_-élixfyto be executed.

3.7.1H.e4ard the learned counsel on both the sides and

"..fwperiusedHthe writ petition papers. LL

'/'

,#

4. Indisputediy, I.A.6 has not been considered___and

disposed of. In the circumstances of the matteryjvrithiotiyt

going into the merit or otherwise of the contesjtionsii’rai”seG:i ‘

on both sides, I deem it appropzriarteto

proceedings in E.P.7/OS oniy tun I.;}’-\.6::’_’i_A’iii”eVd ino-sy.ss;*’io~sf’is[y_

considered and disposed or’ ,

In order to expedite thieiicourtiwherein
O.S.66/O6 is pending; to hear and
dispose of I.A_,v6-filed expedition and
at any event’, tt4~ro.y.m’oinths from the date
a copy.ivof–‘this’orderis ‘o’nui–ts record by either of the
parties:._’ of the order passed on

I.A.6 in d§£¥…_Vi56/£56,’ the ‘Execution Court shail take note of

the»*’-result _there”of….a.n.o’ proceed further in the matter in

a,cco.rd an’ce’w’ith_ law.

” A stands disposed of accordingly.
sa/–

Judge

” Sect?