- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2156 WP No. 100621 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 100621 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. JAVEED @ JAHEED S/O. KHADIRSAB DODAMANI, AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O. WARD NO.4, MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT, PIN. 587313. 2. KUTABUDDIN S/O. HUSSENSAB DODAMANI, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O: WARD NO.4, MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN: 587 313. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI S. B. HEBBALLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UDAYSING S/O ABASAHEB PADATARE, AGE : 64 YEARS, OCC : AGRICULTURE, R/O SIDRAMESHWAR NAGAR, NEAR SIDRAMESHWAR TEMPLE, MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. VENKAT S/O. ABASAHAB PADATARE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S. 2. SMT. SUSHILABAI W/O. VENKAT PADATARE, AGE : 69 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : SANDUR, DIST : BALLARI, PIN : 583119. 3. VIJAYA D/O. VENKAT PADATARE, AGE : 49 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : SANDUR, DIST : BALLARI, PIN : 583119. ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2156 WP No. 100621 of 2025 4. SMT. SHOBHA D/O. VENKAT PADATARE, AGE : 44 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : SANDUR, DIST : BALLARI, PIN : 583119. 5. BABURAO S/O VENKAT PADATARE, AGE : 42 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, R/O : SANDUR, DIST : BALLARI, PIN : 583119. 6. SMT. SARALA D/O. VENKAT PADATARE, AGE : 40 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : SANDUR, DIST : BALLARI, PIN : 583119. 7. GANESH S/O. VENKAT PADATARE, AGE : 39 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, R/O : SANDUR, DIST : BALLARI, PIN : 583119. 8. SHRIMANT S/O. VENKAT PADATARE, AGE : 36 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, R/O : SANDUR, DIST : BALLARI, PIN : 583119. 9. SMT. RADHA D/O. VENKAT PADATARE, AGE : 34 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : SANDUR, DIST : BALLARI, PIN : 583119. SWAMIRAO RAUSAHEB PADATARE SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S. 10. SMT. GAYATRI W/O. SWAMIRAO PADATARE, AGE : 62 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : SANDUR, DIST : BALLARI, PIN : 583119. IMAMBU HUSENSAB DODAMANI SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S. 11. KHADIRSAB S/O. HUSENSAB CHOUDARI, AGE : 57 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, R/O: WARD NO.IV, MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2156 WP No. 100621 of 2025 12. SMT. JULEKA W/O.MALIKSAB BAGAWAN, AGE : 64 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 13. SMT. SAIDAMA W/O. MANUSAB BAGAWAN, AGE : 58 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 14. SMT. SAINAJ W/O.KUTUBUDDIN BAGAWAN, AGE : 56 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 15. SMT. HASEENA W/O MEERASAB BAGAWAN, AGE : 44 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 16. SMT. MAMTAZ W/O. SHABBIRAHMED SOUDAGAR, AGE : 43 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 17. MEHABOOBSAB S/O. RAHIM DODAMANI, AGE : 44 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, R/O MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 18. HUSSENSAB S/O. RAHIM DODAMANI, AGE : 39 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 19. RAFIQ S/O. RAHIM DODAMANI, AGE : 34 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 20. SMT.RESHMA D/O. RAHIM DODAMANI, (RESHMA W/O SARFARAJ BAGAWAN) AGE : 29 YEARS, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2156 WP No. 100621 of 2025 OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. KHADIR S/O. HUSENSAB DODAMANI SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S. 21. SMT. NOORJAN W/O KHADIRSAB DODAMANI, AGE : 59 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : WARD NO 4, MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 22. AMEENSAB S/O KHADIRSAB DODAMANI, AGE : 39 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, R/O WARD NO 4, MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 23. SMT. SAYYADSAB S/O KHADIRSAB DODAMANI, AGE : 37 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, R/O : WARD NO 4, MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 24. MALANABI D/O.KHADIRSAB DODAMANI, AGE : 32 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, WARD NO 4, MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. RAJESAB S/O. HUSSENSAB DODAMANI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S. 25. SMT. AKTARABANU W/O RAJESAB DODAMANI, AGE : 50 YEARS, OCC : HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 26. SMT. ANEESABANU D/O. RAJESAB DODAMANI, AGE 21 YEARS, OCC : STUDENT, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2156 WP No. 100621 of 2025 27. RAMEEZABANU D/O RAJESAB DODAMANI, AGE : 19 YEARS, OCC : STUDENT, R/O : MUDHOL, DIST : BAGALKOT, PIN : 587313. 28. SADIQ S/O RAJESAB DODAMANI, AGE : 17 YEARS, OCC : STUDENT, A MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS MINOR GUARDIAN RESPONDENT NO. 25 29. TOUFIQ S/O RAJESAB DODAMANI, AGE : 15 YEARS OCC : STUDENT, A MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS MINOR GUARDIAN RESPONDENT NO. 25. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SABEEL AHMED, ADVOCATE FOR R1) (SERVICE OF NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 9 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.01.2025 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MUDHOL ON I.A.NO.XI FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN EXECUTION PETN.NO.122/2016, A COPY OF THE SAID ORDER IS PRODUCED HEREIN AS PER ANNEXURE-G AND REJECT THE SAME IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Petitioners are before this court seeking for the following reliefs: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2156 WP No. 100621 of 2025 i. A writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned order dated 13-01-2025 passed by the principal civil judge and JMFC, Mudhol on IA No.XI filed by the respondent no.1 in Execution Petn.No.122/2016, a copy of the said order is produced herein as per Annexure-G and reject the same in the interest of justice and equity. ii. Any other writ, order or direction as deemed fit the granted in the interest of justice. 2. What is under challenge is the order passed on I.A.No.XI filed in Execution Petition No.122 of 2016, by virtue of which a ‘Delivery Warrant’ was directed to be issued in furtherance of the Decree for possession which was passed in O.S.No.335/1989. 3. The submission of Sri S.B.Hebballi, learned counsel for the petitioners is that the execution petition itself was barred by time and therefore the application could not have been considered. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the papers. 5. A perusal of the papers indicates that the Decree for possession was passed on 24.02.2000. Subsequent thereto, the matter was taken up on a first appeal in - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2156 WP No. 100621 of 2025 R.A.No.17 of 2000, which came to be dismissed for non-prosecution on 13.10.2006. The matter having been taken up by way of Special Leave Petition in SLP No.29096 of 2018, which came to be dismissed 10.09.2018 in the meanwhile the execution petition was filed in the year 2016. 6. Thus it is clear that the execution petition is within time and is not barred by limitation, as sought to be contended. What can be seen is that a Decree for possession was passed on 13.10.2006 is yet to be executed. When the matter was taken up on 29.01.2025, three days time was granted to the counsel for the petitioners to obtain instructions and file an affidavit as to when the petitioners would vacate the subject premises, such being the case, an application came to be filed by petitioners before the trial Court under Section 151 of CPC for recalling the Delivery Warrant issued on the ground that respondent No.1 had agreed not to precipitate the matter. Such an application could not have been filed - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2156 WP No. 100621 of 2025 when the respondent No.1 had undertaken before this court not to precipitate the matter. By virtue of the said submission, the Delivery Warrant itself was sought to be recalled which is not permissible. The conduct on part of the respondents in continuing to be in possession from the year 2006 till date even post the dismissal of the Special Leave Petition and delaying the execution proceedings cannot be countenanced either in law or facts. Furthermore, the application as filed speaks volumes of the conduct of the Judgement Debtors/ petitioners. 7. In that view of the matter, the only ground made out being that the execution petition is barred by limitation, which it is not. I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the trial Court. The petition stands dismissed. The trial Court would have to proceed. 8. At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will vacate the premises without demur given two months time, his - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2156 WP No. 100621 of 2025 submission is placed on record, an affidavit in that regard to be filed by the petitioners on or before 11.02.2025. 9. The executing court is directed to adjourn the execution petition by 2 months and if the petitioners were not to vacate the premised by 05.04.2025, the execution court is directed to proceed with the matter. If the affidavit of undertaking is not filed by 11.02.2025, the executing court would have to be directed to proceed with the matter forthwith. 10. With the above observations, the petition is disposed. 11. Though the above petition is disposed re-list this matter on 13.02.2025, to take the affidavit of undertaking on record. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE CKK/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10