IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAI). % % f% % _
DATED THIS THE 22" DAY Q§%jsEPT£Mm;kR2t§ox [ %
BEFORE'-z.' 2 T
THE H()N'BLE MR. JUST'i€3,}3~VANAN§:D__ BYRA£iE;m*,*f
WRIT PETITION N0.3.035%"8;'20o3 (GM:cPc;:'i
BETWEEN:
Raju, ,
S50 ShiVa{am"*S%"'ef£§{, _ _, '
Aged «$8 yearsg» _ '
Occ: B£:.sin¢ss,.
R50 1 crogs, 'Gand§1ifi2:Tgaf;" " v
Eharwad. V . PETITIGNER
< _(B§,%:L_SE}§3r§,; Sh;ae!¥é.fsha.A'Nedopant, Advacafe)
1] X chggnkafi Khan,
SE0 Atlabéx Pathan,
Agédé-2 years,
" 'TC)§c: Business,
' * .R;f3.} Rasulpnri Qni,
Dharwad.
'4 " ' Aciamkhan
S50 Allabax Pathan,
Aged 35 years,
Occ: Business,
R/0 Rasalpuri Ong Dharwad, .g.RE1SPONDEN'I'
(By Shré.K,L.Pati}, Adv, for R-2)
/5
This Writ Petition is filed E.II'l€i6I' Articles 226 -ef
the Cezzstitutioe of India, pmying to set asiée the_ei'cieif'_.dé1ted
1892008 passed in Exeeutien Case Ne.99,?2OG8
Court of III Additional Civii Judge (Senior Di§'.iStQ:1't)?iDiV1at"waCi'
as per Arxnexere-J.
This petition eeming on for Preiiimineifif Heeii1'£g ._
the Court made the following:
i9RflERifi iiV .
Heard the Ceunsel Affl1'i.1_Ji}€ it M
2. The tii.e:iud4gineiit¥d'ebter having suffered
a judgtiieiit si:it_iiifiied by the respondents fer
rec0ver}?”ef”;}0ssee§ii§e i§2§}§”3fi’f33.t’S {if rent. The suit having
beengvdeeieeciiiibgii ejiidgziieeiiti and decree dated 18.2.2008, which
‘”ae.e(i:’di1ig’ toiithe petitioner is an uizexeeutabie decree, as there is
it”inad_eeuate_~V«;ie:§e1’i’f§:ti0n of the suit property to identify the same
i . by iiiieteei eixéi bounds, it is the ease ef the petitififler that the
iig.,’I’1’iial4_.ACc§izrt had isseed a deiivery warrant en the basis of the
‘ iieeeiiptiee of property mentieeed in the process meme by the
i mtiespondeets. The piaint significantly did not contain a schedule
in which the property was cieseribed. P3re,graph-2 of the plaint
eeiy indicated that the suit prepertyg hotel building situated