- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11966 WP No. 49415 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 49415 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SUVARNAMMA W/O SANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 2. SRI SANNAPPA S/O GPEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT KALLAHALLLA VILLAGE, BADAGA (POST), KANDALIKE HOBLI, H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571 121. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI.AKSHAY.S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.SRINIVASA.D C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. NANJUNDASWAMY S/O CHIKKANNASHETTY, R/AT MACHANAIKANAHALLI VILLAGE, BADAGA (POST), KANDALIKE HOBLI, H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571 121 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.P.NATARAJU & SRI.M.S.RAJAPPA ., ADVOCATE) THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER ON THE MEMO OF CALCULATION PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC AT H.D.KOTE, IN EX.NO.361/2012 DATED 25.10.2018, DIRECTING THE PETITIONERS TO PAY A SUM OF RS.1,47,314/- TO Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11966 WP No. 49415 of 2018 THE RESPONDENT TOWARDS THE BALANCE AMOUNT, VIDE ANNEXURE-D, AS ILLEGAL, VOID AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL; ISSUE DIRECTION TO THE HON'BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC AT H.D.KOTE, IN EX.NO.361/2012 TO ACCEPT THE MEMO OF CLCULATION DATED 06.09.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS, VIDE ANNEXURE-C1. THIS PETITION, 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 ORAL ORDER The petitioners in this petition are the Judgment Debtors in execution proceedings in E.P.No.361/2012 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC., at H.D.Kote (for short, ‘Executing Court’) which is filed by the respondent/Decree Holder herein seeking to enforce the judgment and decree dated 07.11.2008 passed in O.S.No.28/2007 in which, the petitioners herein were directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,16,416/- together with interest at 18% p.a. 2. A memo of calculation has been prepared by the Executing Court in terms of which, the petitioners - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11966 WP No. 49415 of 2018 herein have been directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,47,314/- towards the balance amount payable in the said execution proceedings. 3. The contention of the petitioners is that the respondent herein had also filed another suit in O.S.No.30/2007 which was decreed for a sum of Rs.1,52,500/- and in furtherance to judgment and decree passed therein, he has filed another execution proceedings in E.P.No.362/2012. 4. The further contention of the petitioners is that they have paid a sum of Rs.1,93,000/- as against Rs.1,52,500/- in the said execution case in E.P.No.362/2012 and that they have paid excess amount of Rs.40,500/-. That if the said excess amount paid in the said E.P.No.362/2012 is adjusted and set off against the amount being claimed in E.P.No.361/2012, there remains no balance to be paid by the petitioners. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11966 WP No. 49415 of 2018 5. This submission of the petitioners has been declined by the Executing Court by its order dated 25.10.2018 impugned in this petition on the premise that the question of adjustment of excess amount would be decided if the Decree Holder files a memo as contemplated under Order 21 Rule 2 of CPC. Having said that, the Executing Court proceeded to accept the report of the CMO and the memo of calculation. 6. This Court after hearing the parties had called upon the learned counsel for the respondent/decree holder to submit his memo of calculation. Learned counsel for the respondent today has filed memo dated 18.03.2025 with a calculation stating that the petitioners/Judgment Debtors have indeed pay an excess of Rs.12,000/- in the Ex.No.362/2012. 7. From the above contentions, what emanates is that, financial transaction had taken place between the same parties which resulted though in filing two different suits, two different judgment and decrees and filing of two - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:11966 WP No. 49415 of 2018 different execution petitions. It is also not disputed that the petitioners/Judgment Debtors have indeed made certain payments. Though they claim that they have made excess payment of Rs.40,500/-, which now according to the Decree Holder, is only Rs.12,000/-. 8. The Executing Court has however gone on the technicalities of requirement of Decree Holder filing an application under Order 21 Rule 2 of CPC, and only thereafter to consider adjustment of excess payment, if any. 9. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners/Judgment Debtors as well as respondent/Decree Holder submit unison that the matter be remitted to the Executing Court with a direction to calculate the amount paid by the petitioners being the Judgment Debtors in both the aforesaid execution petitions in Ex.P.Nos.361/2012 and 362/2012 and thereafter arrive at the amount actually due and payable by them to the respondent/Decree Holder. They further - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:11966 WP No. 49415 of 2018 submit that the parties would file their respective memos of calculation before the Executing Court, assisting the CMO to arrive at a proper calculation. 10. Said submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties is taken on record. 11. In view of the aforesaid commonality of the facts, parties and the claims made, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the Executing Court that notwithstanding pendency of two different execution petitions, it shall take into consideration the amount paid by the petitioners against the claim made in the aforesaid two execution petitions in aggregate and thereafter come to the conclusion as to the excess amount is paid if any, or any balance amount is payable by the petitioners/Judgment Debtors to the respondent/Decree Holder and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. 12. The parties are at liberty to file their separate memo calculations before the Executing Court. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:11966 WP No. 49415 of 2018 13. The respondent/Decree Holder is at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited by the petitioners, if any, before the Executing Court. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE NC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6