- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21116 W.P. No.51593/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.51593/2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. B.N. ASHA D/O LATE P. NARASIMHA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NO.252, 1ST BLOCK 3RD CROSS, PEENYA 1ST STAGE PEENYA, BENGALURU-560058. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SAMPATH A, ADV.,) AND: 1. SRI. KUMAR S/O NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO.252, GROUND FLOOR (PORTION) C/O. LATE P. NARASIMHAMURTHY BUILDING 1ST BLOCK, 3RD CROSS PEENYA IST STAGE, PEENYA BENGALURU-560058. 2. SMT. SUNITHA W/O LATE P. NARASIMHA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT NO.252, GROUND FLOOR MANJUNATHA NILAYA KAR MOBILE ROAD, 4TH MAIN ROAD 1ST BLOCK, 1ST STAGE, PEENYA BENGALURU-560058. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.K. VASANTH, ADV., FOR R2) V/O DTD:09.12.2021 NOTICE ISSUED TO R1 STAND WAIVED) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court of karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21116 W.P. No.51593/2019 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI/OR ANY OTHER WRIT/DIRECTION/ORDER FOR QUASHING/SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE XII ADDL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE CCH-27 BENGALURU PASSED ON IA NO.19 IN EX NO.171/2011 DTD.2.2.2019 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-H BY ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW IA NO.19 FILED BY THE PETITIONER & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking following reliefs: "a) Issue A Writ Of Certiorari/or any other Writ/Direction/Order for quashing/setting aside the order passed by the Hon'ble XII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, CCH-27, Bengaluru passed on I.A. No.19 in Ex. No.171/2011, dated 02/02/2019 produced at Annexure-'H' by allowing the Writ Petition and consequently allow IA No.19 filed by the Petitioner. b) Grant such other relief/s that this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the circumstances of the case interest of justice and equity." 2. Sri.Sampath A., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is the decree holder in O.S.No.3906/2009 and filed an Execution case No.171/2011 to execute the said decree. In the said proceedings, respondent No.2 entered as obstructer and adduced the evidence and got marked Exs.P1 to P77. When the matter was posted for the evidence of decree - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21116 W.P. No.51593/2019 holder, an application in IA.No.19 under Order 7 Rule 14(3) r/w Section 151 of CPC was filed seeking permission for production of documents. However, the trial Court rejected the said application by recording the reasons that the obstructer is required to establish her title and possession over the suit schedule property and burden is on her. Hence, the question of allowing the application would not arise. The said finding of the trial Court is contrary to the settled position of law and the documents now sought to be produced along with the application are very much necessary to establish a case of the decree holder. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition. 3. Per contra, Sri.K.K.Vasanth, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 supports the impugned order of the trial Court and submits that the documents now sought to be produced before the execution Court are already before it, as the obstructer has produced it and got marked as Exs.P1 to P77. The trial Court has rightly recorded that it is the obstructer to make out grounds - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21116 W.P. No.51593/2019 under Order 21 Rule 97 of CPC. Hence, these documents are not necessary to decide the case. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the petition. 4. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and meticulously perused the material available on record. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions advanced. 5. The petitioner is the decree holder in O.S.No.3906/2009 and to execute the said decree, she field execution No.171/2011. In the said proceedings, respondent No.2 entered as obstructer under Order 21 Rule 97 to 101 and read with Section 47 of CPC. In the said proceedings the records indicate that the obstructer has adduced the evidence as PW.1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P77. Thereafter, the matter was posted for adducing the evidence of the decree holder. At that time IA.No.19 was filed by the decree holder under Order 7 Rule 14(3) r/w Section 151 of CPC seeking permission to produce the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21116 W.P. No.51593/2019 documents and for condonation of delay. The averments made in the application indicates the reasons for the production of documents. The documents now sought to be produced are culled out in the impugned order at page Nos.2 and 3. The records indicate that the documents at Sl.No.1, 3, 4 and 6 are already on record and marked as Exs.P32, P10, P11 and P25 respectively. Hence, those documents need not to be produced in the said proceedings. Insofar as other documents are concerned, the decree holder has every right to produce the documents and make a claim in the execution proceedings to deny the assertion of the obstructer. The documents sought are necessary to decide the controversy between the parties and required for complete adjudication of the case. By allowing the application, no prejudice would be caused to the other side and it being the right of the decree holder to putforth her case against the obstructer, hence, interest of justice would be met if the said - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21116 W.P. No.51593/2019 application is allowed. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 02.02.2019 passed on IA.No.19 in Ex.No.171/2011 by the XII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, CCH-27, Bengaluru is hereby set aside. Consequently IA.No.19 is allowed. iii) The petitioner is permitted to produce the documents at Sl.No.2, 5 and 7 to 17 referred in the impugned order at the time of adducing the evidence. iv) The parties to the proceedings are directed to appear before the execution Court on 05.07.2025 and on the said date, the decree holder shall adduce the evidence. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52