High Court Karnataka High Court

Rajaram vs Abdul Kareem on 10 September, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Rajaram vs Abdul Kareem on 10 September, 2009
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
WP N065124 of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBERvx2'{§:O»9.
BEFORE  i'it

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJIT  i T' 1

WRIT PETITION No.65 1 24%'./2d0'9j'.{":'I1>\/ii 4-CVPKQI.  'V 
BETWEEN: i i i .

Rajaram,  _

S/o Jivaji Betsur, Age-':..MajQ.:3"" »  V _

Occ: Pvt. Service 82; bI.Is_i:nes;S,  V.   

R/0 C/O B.B.Chemica1s  it  

Factory by the side of MaytIr' --. A  I '-- "

Resort. P.B.N.aIiipr_1al £iighWay-«.Nc§.4.,VV ' 

At/Post:   . i'    

Talz DharwadfvV';""'?._ I    ...PETITIONER

(By Sri}.Kuberago.Iid._éi;'S$KDradur, Advocate)

A NI-1;

 V.  . Abi§:fi1 sgareiirn, H  """ " it
2 » S'/-»QVNa_r1r1e$ab__ Dhawad,
'  Age: '§,{e':a.rS.,VV.Occ: Driver,

/ o.Pat}I-étn galli, Navalur,
'Ta1:__ Dlriarwiad. .. RESPONDENT

..T:his petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of

= the Constitution of India praying to consider the Misc.
application No.51/08 on the file of the Principal Civii
%_J1′:Idge (Sr.Dn.) and CJM, Dharwad As per Annexure-B;

WP No.65 124 of 2009

and direction not to proceed the execution petition
No.271/2008, to Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and
CJM, Dharwad, until the disposal of the
Misc.App1ication No.51 /O8

This petition coming on for preliminary.fh.e_aring._

this day, the Court made the following:
0 R D E R

A suit is filed by the
money. It has been decreed.<_exparte."'
come to know has moved a mii's.c_e1l.aneous_iiiapplioation in
Misc.No.S1/2008. the petitioner

submi'tisilth'at3a_n aipplic'a.tion iorilstay is also maintained.
The learned notice to the respondent.

In the_Vmeanti_meV, fexecuition proceedings are initiated in

'ii"=..}3x;iNo.i3"7l]'2008.ii""Notice has been ordered in the

I-..eiX.fec"L1"tio12._"proceedings. The petitioner has entered

appearance} But, however, it is noticed from the order

i'""'..iVi"'3heeti "that nothing has happened either in the

'W. lmii'scel1aneous application or in the execution

proceedings. To my mind, this petition is premature.
fl}

/ .

J

WP No.65124 of 2009

2. Indeed, it is open for the petitioner to press for
an interim order before the iearned Judge before whom
the miscellaneous proceedings are pending. The

v._.(‘ i.

Judge shall consider the appiicationj’ iiriR’:.s:if£ghjt I

perspective.

Petition stands disposed is

invader