- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10382 W.P. No.53441/2018 C/W W.P. No.55447/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO.53441/2018 (GM-CPC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.55447/2018 (GM-CPC) IN W.P. No.53441/2018: BETWEEN: JNANA BHARATI SCHOOL REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL NANDINI SHIRAHATTI AT K.M. ROAD, KADUR CHICKAMAGALUR KARNATAKA 577 548. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUDHARSHAN SURESH, ADV.,) AND: 1. M/S. EDU SMART SERVICES PVT. LTD. A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT L-74 MAHIPALPUR EXTENSION NEW DELHI 110 037. 2. M/S. EDUCOMP SOLUTIONS LTD A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.1211 PADMA TOWERS-1 5, RAJENDRA PALACE NEW DELHI 110008. Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10382 W.P. No.53441/2018 C/W W.P. No.55447/2018 ALSO AT NO. 21, BRIGADE SQUARE 2ND FLOOR, CAMBRIDGE ROAD ULSOOR, BANGLAORE KARNATAKA 560008. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P.P. JAYAKUMARA, ADV., FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDER OF ATTACHMENT DATED 08-08.2018 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU IN EXECUTION PETITION NO.97 OF 2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-F & ETC. IN W.P. NO.55447/2018: BETWEEN: SHANKAR VIDYAMANDIRA REP. BY CHANDRASHEKAR SHIVACHARYA SWAMIJI AT MARUTHI NAGAR, NELLUR GATE CHIKMAGALUR, KARNATAKA-577 133. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUDHARSHAN SURESH, ADV.,) AND: 1. M/S. EDU SMART SERVICES PVT LTD. A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT L-74 MAHIPALPUR EXTENSION NEW DELHI-110 037. 2. M/S. EDUCOMP SOLUTIONS LTD A REGISTERED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.1211 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10382 W.P. No.53441/2018 C/W W.P. No.55447/2018 PADMA TOWERS-1 5, RAJENDRA PLACE NEW DELHI-110 008. ALSO AT NO.21, BRIGADE SQUARE 2ND FLOOR, CAMBRIDGE ROAD ULSOOR, BANALORE KARNATAKA-560 008. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P.P. JAYAKUMAR, ADV., FOR R1 & R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF ATTACHMENT DATED 31.7.2018 PASSED BY THE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIOSN JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALUR IN EXECUTION PETITION NO.78 OF 2017 AT ANNEX-F. GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF ATTACHMENT DATED 31.7.2018 PASSED BY THE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGLUR IN EXECUTION PETITION NO.78/2017 AT ANNEX-F THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10382 W.P. No.53441/2018 C/W W.P. No.55447/2018 ORAL ORDER In these two matters, petitioners who are the judgment debtors in the execution proceedings in Ex.P.Nos.97/2016 and 78/2017 which are initiated by the respondents in both these petitions seeking execution of arbitral award, which they have obtained against the petitioners herein for recovery of amount, are before this Court being aggrieved by the order issuing warrant of attachment of movables by the Executing Court in the aforesaid Execution petitions. 2. Though the notice is served on the respondents, there is no representation. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners/judgment debtors, drawing attention of this Court to clause 9.5 of the Tripartite agreement dated 21.02.2011 stated to have been entered into between the respondents and the petitioners herein, submits that since the parties had agreed that the Courts at Delhi alone shall have sole and exclusive jurisdiction to entertain and decide all and any - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10382 W.P. No.53441/2018 C/W W.P. No.55447/2018 disputes or differences arising between the parties, the initiation of the execution proceedings before the Executing Court at Chikkamagalur is one without jurisdiction and runs contrary to the terms of agreement. He relies upon the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Indus Mobile Distribution Private Limited v. Datawind Innovations Private Limited and Others1 and in the case of A.B.C. Laminart (P) Ltd and Another v. A.P. Agencies, Salem2 in support of his submission. Referring to the aforesaid two judgments, learned counsel submits that the Executing Court erred in entertaining the Execution petitions. 4. On a specific query by this Court, learned counsel for the petitioners submits though he has raised the objections with regard to jurisdiction, orders in that regard have not been passed by the Executing Court inasmuch as the petitioners have approached this Court 1 (2017) 7 SCC 678 2 (1989) 2 SCC 163 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10382 W.P. No.53441/2018 C/W W.P. No.55447/2018 soon after issuance of the warrant for attachment of the movables. 5. In that view of the matters, the matters are relegated to the Executing Court, who shall advert to and adjudicate the contention raised by the petitioners with regard to the jurisdiction and after affording opportunity to the respondents/decree holders, pass an appropriate order in that regard. The Executing Court shall proceed with the matter only thereafter. 6. No view is expressed in this order with regard to merits or otherwise of the claim/issue raised by the petitioners herein. 7. With the above directions, both the petitions are disposed of. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7