High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri R Maregowda vs Sri Udeda Sanna Mallappa on 1 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri R Maregowda vs Sri Udeda Sanna Mallappa on 1 April, 2009
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
WP No. 130532097

IN THE HIGH COURT 0:? KARNATAKQQQQ ' '  *' 

C§RCL¥I'I' BENCH AT_§)H»ARW_s5a'I}' ~ -- :: _f   
DATED THIS THE 18? DA?     '&
Baéagm     u. .
THE HOAVBLE MR.JG§fiET:':'Ic:-%§_"';~Ig>. 
BETWEEN:    'V   1'
      
S/0 Nagan:ago'Wd&,_...';-_V ' _ _ " = ' »
Aged. about 48 --:j';*é:ars, " '

R/at somaIapura'*%Image;  A 
B:€11aI'§:"§'a11ik"§%I£1Cl IZ%isi:fi§:'i:.._ _ -- ...Peti{i0ner

{By sx~;'}';3.S;-Y;§c£ra,3::.§i; »£§-:iv._.:)" 



 '  _S:'iv.'i}iie*;;2:;1 Sauna Mafiappa,
. Sf? K*3lfibfi39€P3?3&.
'  Aged V:--:1}'3'c;}:i .53 yams,
%R/at Semaiapura Village,

  and District. ...Resp0:1dent

 {By 'S:i.";;_3asava;«aj, Adv}

» This ysfifion is flied 11n::h.=:r Ariiczies 226 and 22'? 0f £3116

" T '{IJ031,s£:i€utio:1 of India praying to $61: aside the ccmon order

  €¥'fi;.18.7.2{}8? an IA NOJEI and W in E.P;34/2905 passsé.

  _y}3§;r'£¥:1e learned; 2314 Add}; Civil Judge (Sr.®n.) Baflaxjr', at
" &z:1n5X1;re«& and 51:43.,

This petition: (taming an fer pmliminaxy hearing in 'B'
gmup, this day, the Court mafia the following:



w? No. 13057' ;200':v'

C} R D E R V

1.

The petitioner is the judgment; debtor. _”‘”I'”he’
is the decree helder. The suit by 1;-ém’
money has been decreed €r;1..e ‘e;ia1,’V:C’»0ur’fg Lee
petitioner to pay a sums of at the
rate of 24% 13.3. The execution in

Execution ?et:it;ion. Now3%¥{2{.3rO5.V – _

2. The pf counsel for the
petiti0Ixer”ia;. has been issued eieariy
in violaiiofl _§::>iem~ Xx: Rule 3’7 of the Code

of Civil Prwegiure :i3_ms;.11E1:1§:E1 as before issuance of the arrest

A_ wa3fréznt_x1;-:9 Shem’. V,c_:_a;u»se notice was issued. He further

‘5jihmi:£e_v “‘.~”sf;_i¥3seque13.t1y,_ the judgmem éehtor entered

two applications i.e., fer recalling of the

313$ aise fie ascertain Whether the judgment

K Ldebter V533 means to pay the deereetal ammmt The irial

.’ has iejeeted both the apialicaiions. Tszm more

“éippiieatiens are flied by the }3€f;iii02£1fiI’ inflow’ IAs–HZ and EV

emre again for determining whether the jueigeeent éebtor 13%

WP No, 1305′?/2007

in a position ta pay the ammmt and also fer .

eafiier order. Both the app1iCaiiOI}§”§3IE I”€_jii;:?”C”lit’i-.’3: ” ”

which the judgmfifit. debtor is beforfi-,:’t§1i3′ A’

3. I have perused the . as: ‘as the ‘V

impugned mder passed; Cfyurt oi} all the:

app ficaiiens .

4. Appa:en_€1jf; ;;j[f’i3: not gustified in
Izzjecting the arrest warrant.

I:1dced§ if”§1as: 531 of the Code cf Civil
Pr0cedfi rs:%,vhi§::i1 with 21 pewsr to execute and

9113 of the’: Iliixdés Qf;€.x€r;ufi o:1 in respect. of I’€’COV€I’_§7 of money

* is the 3;4i1t:i”g;:1$11t ciebtor in civii prises}, Endetzd, the

§1*<'"«:«'i:'2*:':';:*:*;<;::"axféiiltiialso indicate that the said order' of detention

£13; F§i"{?'i:i yxiscéfi $3511 {Let be erdemd unless a Show cause natice

is i3s'ua§ '$9 vthe jucigmerzt. dabtor and an cspportunity is given

VA £0 file his objectiens as is Why he shoulfi 1101; be

' ta €116 civfl prison. Imieed Section 51 of the CPC

u required to be rtiaé with Qréer XXI R316 37, Grder XXI

R1116 3? woulé also speak absent the: power to peimit the:

WP N0. ESOSWQOO?

: 4 :

judgment debtar to Sh()’W caursfi against his
prissn. ‘ I’ V
S. A gcrusai of the oxder-sheet wqulgir 4c1ear13.;

no such exercise has been done :’by :2
Indeed, hnmediately after ;

request made by the deems Qzufi has
straightaway iss1:1t:d thé of View that
the said order of in violation

01″ the pxovisioiié. r.fta?jv{);fi:ierV’:XXI Rule 3? of the

CPC.

6. In sbéfai” v§’E3.éV”;L.1’£§V.'(3¥i’€,i:E§:}?’S’ passed by the Executing Court

on ilrfifié: ‘iagypiicafivflfi vef the jusigmeni: debtor so as. iii} ascertain

.ix*h$fE1£;; hfi:.}:§a3 any 33168135 ta gray the dflcltefa}. axnount, the

cannot be fauited.

?, izifilséd; the Exccuting Court Cazlnot go on making a

‘A x V’ Lriovizggg e :iqui3.y as to whather the judgmami iiebtmf has means

. ‘ii? ‘gags; the amount. The factual aspect 0f the matter is not

“disputed. inasmuch as the judgmezit (Ishtar has suffemd 3

/

V/./7

dfigjlfifix Thé Exécuiing Court is aiways obligéd ‘£0 executa 3

W? 539.1305’?/2007

U1

éecree. Indeed, an observation is also made h_j;*..th(f:” =

Judge to the ::fi”€ct that the judgzjcnt d_;+:’bf<§1*i:'_;i:3é;€= _'hav:;j

sufficient means to pay the decre:eia1" T::&.33:o'T;1;1t and : i:t:7:$:

trying to avoid his abligation its safisfj} 'thé r1;ec1*i=;f€§.A..«:

8. Having saié so, i£1i€”‘pe:’titioner i$
enfiiled to succeed o131y’ ‘i£1fl Vjtfofloxxvmg order
is passed: H V’ V V ”

Pfitiiiikfl’ p;3ré:’. ::«’V§’}’1g3:'($¥1it:r pasaed by the
EXeCuti:;g”V {3§iu.1%£ is set aside. The
pefifiofifgr s.}:xé;?.u1 as shew cause notice

to him. the Executing Court and fit:

his 0bj€:€:’£éQns; T21¥é{§:tIza:;rs passed by the Executing Court on

“;§Vi§i1uf5,’t:.I};§L,?;3’€I:”.§:§§}L’j%3§’t7§_E:ltli{}Il$ stamis atenfimscd.

“Rule isstzed and made absolute :0 the extant

S d /_

JUDGE

n Jm,l~=