- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5884 RP No. 188 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REVIEW PETITION NO. 188 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. *SMT. N.G. REKHA W/O NAGARAJ K M, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDENT OF RIGHT SIDE OF HASSAN ROAD, 1ST CROSS, ARASIKERE TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT 573103 2. NAGABHUSHAN S/O VEERABHADRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDENT OF DODDA KUNNALA VILLAGE, KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT 572216 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K.L. SREENIVAS.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MAHESH S/O THAMMANNA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 2. SMT NAGAVENI W/O MAHESH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF RIGHT SIDE OF HASSAN ROAD, 1ST CROSS, CHURCH ROAD, ARASIKERE TOWN, *Corrected vide Court order dated 24.02.2025. Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5884 RP No. 188 of 2024 HASSAN DISTRICT 573103 …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO THE RESPONDENTS D/W V/O 10.02.2025) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1(A) OF R/W SECTION 114 OF CPC, 1908 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION, AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT/ORDER PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT ON 04- 03-2024 IN W.P.NO.6885/2023 (GM-CPC), AND DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This petition takes exception to the order dated 04.03.2024 passed in W.P.No.6885/2023, which was disposed of by this Court. The petitioners were the respondents in the said petition, which was disposed of by holding as under: "1. This petition by the judgment debtors in execution No. 25/2021 on the file the of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Arsikere, is directed against the impugned order dated 16.02.2023 whereby the application I.A. No.1 filed by the respondent – decreeholders seeking attachment of the petition schedule property was allowed by the executing Court. 2. A perusal of the material on record would indicate that the respondent decree-holder instituted the aforesaid execution proceedings seeking to implement and enforce the compromise decree dated 12.04.2019 passed by the trial Court. During the pendency of the execution - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5884 RP No. 188 of 2024 proceedings, the respondent decree-holder filed the instant application, I.A. No. 1 under Order XXI Rule 54 CPC seeking attachment of the petition schedule property. The said application was contested by the petitioners judgment debtors on various grounds including specific contention that the trial Court which passed the compromise decree as well as the executing Court did not have the pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the proceedings. After hearing the parties, the trial Court proceed to pass the impugned order allowing I.A. No. 1, aggrieved by which the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 3. A perusal of the material on record would indicate that there are several contentions, issues etc., including the question of pecuniary jurisdiction which arise for consideration in the execution proceeding which would necessarily have to be decided only after enquiry to be conducted by the executing Court as contemplated under section 47 of CPC. Under these circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and direct the executing Court to decide the execution proceedings on merits in terms of Section 47 CPC after conducting necessary enquiry in this regard. All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. Liberty is reserved in favour of the parties to put forth all contentions and adduce oral and documentary evidence in support of their respective case." - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5884 RP No. 188 of 2024 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the material on record. For the order proposed, notice to the respondents is dispensed with. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that subsequent to the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the executing Court has not disposed of the proceedings even till today and necessary directions may be issued to the executing Court in this regard. 4. Having regard to the fact that the executing Court has not disposed of the proceedings in Ex.No.25/2021 even till today, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition without interfering with the aforesaid order passed by this Court and by directing the executing Court to dispose of the proceedings within a period of six [6] months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE RB