- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17795 WP No. 13099 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13099 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT.ANUSHA D. W/O CHANNEGOWDA K AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS DEPUTY DIRECTOR OFFICE WORKING AS D.C.P.O WOMEN'S CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICE BALABHAVANA, M.G. ROAD,TUMAKURU R/AT NEAR NALANDA SCHOOL SAPTHAGIRI LAYOUT TUMAKURU TOWN-572101. 2. CHANNEGOWDA K. S/O KALAVEERAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/O NEAR NALANDA SCHOOL SAPTHAGIRI LAYOUT TUMAKURU TOWN-572101. AND ALSO R/AT KADARAMANAHALLI VILLAGE SEENAPPANAHALLI POST HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI KUNIGAL TALUK-572130. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR C., ADVOCATE) AND: SURESH S/O RAGHAVAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS WORKING AT OFFICE OF SURESH ASSOCIATES NO.213, T.V.COMPLEX, BVK-IYENGAR ROAD Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17795 WP No. 13099 of 2025 BENGALURU-560009. NOW R/AT C/O MOHAN OPPOSITE VEERABHADRASWAMY TEMPLE VEERASAGARA, MELEKOTE ROAD TUMAKURU TOWN-572101. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. V B SIDDARAMAIAH., ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED: 25.03.2025 (ANNEXURE-D) PASSED ON IA IN O.S.NO. 767/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE IIND ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT TUMAKURU BY A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, DIRECTION OR ORDER AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION IA NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER 38 RULE 5 OF CPC BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed by defendant Nos.1 and 2 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 25.03.2025 passed on IA No.2 in O.S.No.767/2024 by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru, whereby, IA Nos. 1 and 2 filed by the plaintiff under Order 38 Rule 5 of CPC has been allowed. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17795 WP No. 13099 of 2025 2. The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.38,50,000/-. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff filed IA No.2 under Order 38 Rule 5 of CPC for attachment of the property before the judgment and the same came to be allowed. Being aggrieved, the petitioners/defendant Nos. 1 and 2 are before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready to furnish security for a sum of Rs.38,50,000/- before the trial court. Hence, he sought for allowing the writ petition. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff submits that the trial court has rightly passed the impugned order. 5. Be that as it may. Now, that the petitioners are ready to furnish indemnity bond for a sum of Rs.38,50,000/-, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the petitioners to furnish indemnity bond for a sum of Rs.38,50,000/- (rupees thirty eight crores fifty - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17795 WP No. 13099 of 2025 lakhs only) within eight weeks from today. Till then the impugned order will be in operation. 6. If the petitioners want to furnish the indemnity bond during the vacation, they can advance the matter by moving before the Vacation Bench. Once, the petitioners furnish the indemnity bond for a sum of Rs.38,50,000/-, subject to the satisfaction of the trial court, the attachment of the property shall be released. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 81