- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3076 WP No. 201248 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.201248 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: KARNATAKA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, NO.43, PRIMROSE ROAD, BANGALORE-560025. REPRESENT BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, MR. MAHESH S/O BHIMSHING, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AMEETH KUMAR DESHPANDE, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NILUFARHANAZ, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. ABDUL MAJEED S/O ALLISAB AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/AT QURESHI MOHALLA, SHORAPUR, DIST. YADGIRI-585224. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, YADGIRI-585202. 3. THE SERICULTURE EXTENSION OFFICER, TSC, SHAHAPUR-585223. Digitally signed by SHIVALEELA DATTATRAYA UDAGI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3076 WP No. 201248 of 2025 4. THE OFFICER IN CHARGE OF RESHMI KRISHI KSHETRA, KAWADIMATTI, SHORAPUR-585224. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDHAPURKAR RAGHAVENDRA SHAMSUNDAR RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. SHESHADRI JAISHANKAR, AGA FOR R2 TO R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION: I) TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 16-04-2025 PASSED IN EXECUTION CASE NO.9 OF 2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHORAPUR (ANNEXURE-A) II) ISSUE SUCH OTHER WRIT/S ORDERS, OR DIRECTIONS AS MAY BE DEEMED FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3076 WP No. 201248 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN) O.S.No.64/2010 was filed by respondent No.1 against respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4, who are different departments of the State. The said suit was filed with the following prayers: “a) A decree of possession of suit land bearing Sy.No.60/2-Aa to the extent of 1 acre 10 guntas northern portion out of 06 acres 00 guntas situated at village Kawadimatti Tq.Shorapur be passed in favour of plaintiff by ejecting the defendants there from; a(1) A decree of mandatory injunction be granted in favour of plaintiff and directing the defendants to demolish the illegal construction made over the suit land. b. Costs of the suit be awarded and c. Any such other relief to which the plaintiff is entitled be awarded.” - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3076 WP No. 201248 of 2025 2. O.S.No.64/2010 has been decreed and following order has been passed: “The suit of plaintiff is hereby decreed with cost. Consequently, the defendants are hereby directed to hand over the possession of suit schedule property i.e. 01 acre 10 guntas out of 06 acres in land bearing Sy.No.60/2Aa situated at Kawadimatti village, Tq.Shorapur by demolishing the construction existed in the suit schedule property within 6 months from the date of this judgment. If the defendants fail to handover the possession of the suit schedule property by demolishing the illegal construction made by them in the suit schedule property, then the plaintiff is at liberty to take possession of the suit schedule property as per law. Draw decree accordingly.” 3. To execute the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.64/2010, E.P.No.9/2021 has been preferred by respondent No.1 herein. The executing Court has passed the following order: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3076 WP No. 201248 of 2025 “Reissue delivery of possession warrant with the help of bailiff.” 4. Pursuant to the said order, the respondent No.1 herein has tried to get the same executed. At that juncture, the present writ petition came to be filed by the petitioner herein, who is a 100% State Government of Karnataka own undertaking, contending that the suit schedule property of O.S.No.64/2010 was put in its possession by respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 herein and it has also built a warehouse in the property concerned and without making it a party to the proceedings O.S.No.64/2010 came to be filed. It is also submitted that presently the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.64/2010 has been challenged by way of an appeal by the petitioner herein. 5. The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 submits that the State also has been instructed to file an appeal and it is submitted that, by mistake on the last date of hearing it - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3076 WP No. 201248 of 2025 was mentioned that the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.64/2010 has reached finality on the ground that no appeal has been filed. 6. In the present writ petition the petitioner herein has challenged the order of delivery of possession warrant issued by the Executing Court, on the ground that the Executing Court, without considering the objector /application filed by the petitioner has passed the impugned order. 7. The aforementioned facts are un-disputed. 8. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 are the State and the petitioner is also a State Government of Karnataka undertaking and submits that the State was duly represented in O.S.No.64/2010 and prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 9. This Court on 02.05.2025 has passed the following order: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3076 WP No. 201248 of 2025 “Heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 4. Issue emergent notice to respondent No.1. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that decree for possession and mandatory injunction is passed in respect of the property which is constructed by the petitioner and the petitioner was not made as party to the proceedings though amendment is sought during the pendency of the petition on the premise that construction has taken place during the pendency of the proceeding. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not made as a party before the Executing Court and the decree for mandatory is likely to be executed. Considering the fact that the petitioner is not made as a party to the proceedings, the operation of the decree is stayed till next date. List this matter on 06.06.2025. Petitioner to remove the office objections. Hand delivery of this order is permitted.” - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3076 WP No. 201248 of 2025 10. Further on 06.06.2025 the following order has been passed: “Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent Nos.2 to 4. This is a case wherein the State has suffered a decree and the suit schedule property has been directed to be given possession to respondent No.1 herein. Admittedly, no appeal has been filed against the said judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.64/2010. It has attained finality. When respondent No.1 was forced to file an execution petition to take possession of the property, at that time, the petitioner who is a State Government of Karnataka undertaking files an objector application before the Trial Court. However, without considering the same, an order of delivery warrant is said to have been issued by the Trial Court. The same is challenged in this writ proceedings. An interim order is passed on 02.05.2025 staying the decree till the next date of hearing. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays time in the matter. Under the said circumstances, interest of justice would be met if certain rents are ordered to - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3076 WP No. 201248 of 2025 be paid to respondent No.1 as an interim arrangement. The parties are directed to suggest what is the fair rent for the suit schedule property by the next date of hearing. Interim order, if any, is extended till the next date of hearing. List the matter on 16.06.2025.” 11. During the course of the proceedings, the learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that, in the light of appeal having been filed against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.64/2010 and also the objector/application filed in E.P.No.9/2021, if the interim protection given to the petitioner is continued for some time, it would pursue its remedy before the Appellate Court and or the Executing Court itself. 12. The learned counsel for respondent No.1 and the learned Additional Government Advocate have no objection for the same. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3076 WP No. 201248 of 2025 13. Hence the following: ORDER The writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to pursue the appeal filed against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.64/2010 and or objector application filed in E.P.No.9/2021. The First Appellate Court and the Executing Court shall dispose of the matter before it on the merits of the case without being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove. The interim order granted on 02.05.2025 in the present writ petition shall continue for a period of 8 weeks from today. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE SDU/SMP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 20 CT:SI