- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9040 WP No. 104906 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 104906 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: AKSHAY S/O. BHAGAVANT SHIRODKAR, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. NEAR MARIGUDI SCHOOL, RAMANBAIL, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA-581301. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH M. KHARVI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VIJAYALAKSHMI SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY MANAGER, G.P. CENTER COURT ROAD, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA-581301. 2. BHAGAVANT S/O. GANAPATI SHIRODKAR, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: R/O. 3RD KURSE COMPOUND, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA-581301. 3. SANDHYA BHAGAVANT SHIRODKAR, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: R/O. 3RD KURSE COMPOUND, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA-581301. 4. SMT. SUMITRA D/O. BHAGAVANT SHIRODKAR, AGE: 85 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O. GOLEGRI GALLI, BANAVASI ROAD, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA-581301. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY WRIT TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED OF HON’BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC SIRSI IN EX CASE 17/2016 FOR ISSUING ATTACHMENT OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY ON VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9040 WP No. 104906 of 2025 05/04/2025 AND 13/06/2025 CONSEQUENT VIDE ANNEXURE-F 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 PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This Court is not inclined to issue notice to the respondents, as no adverse orders are passed against the respondents, except directing the trial Court to pass orders on the application filed by petitioner in accordance with law. 3. The petitioner is before this Court, aggrieved by the non-consideration of his application under the provisions of Order XXI Rule 58(3A) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). 4. It is the claim of the petitioner that he is son of respondent No.2. He has filed a suit in O.S.No.176/2022 before the Senior Civil Judge, Sirsi, seeking a 1/4th share - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9040 WP No. 104906 of 2025 in the suit property bearing Sy.No.260 A3, Hissa *, measuring 17 guntas and 9 sennes. The said suit filed by the petitioner is pending adjudication for partition. It is the case of the petitioner that he has filed a third-party claim in Ex.Case No.17/2016, claiming his share in the said property. As the property in question was utilized by his father-respondent No.1 by availing a loan and providing a mortgage, an award was subsequently passed for Rs.25,02,170/- as principal, with a total award amount of Rs.36,45,150/-. Respondent No.1-Society thereafter filed an Execution Petition to recover the awarded amount, in which the present petitioner filed an application under Order XXI Rule 58 of CPC, seeking consideration of his claim, as he has a 1/4th share in the said property belonging to his father-respondent No.2. 5. It is grievance of the petitioner that the executing Court, instead of considering the application and passing an order, proceeded to issue attachment of the immovable property without passing any order on his - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9040 WP No. 104906 of 2025 claim application. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court. 6. It is his vehement contention that petitioner has a 1/4th share in the said property, which is sought to be executed by the respondent No.1 and that he would succeed in the said suit for partition. Therefore, the executing Court ought to have considered the application before proceeding to issue an attachment of the immovable property. Hence, due to non-consideration of his application, the petitioner is before this Court. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. I do not find any need for issuance of notice to the respondents, as this Court is not inclined to accept the petition filed by the petitioner except for directing the trial Court to dispose of the application in accordance with the provisions of CPC and in accordance with law. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9040 WP No. 104906 of 2025 8. It is seen that the trial Court, as the executing Court, received the application filed under Order XXI Rule 58, but failed to conduct an enquiry or pass any orders thereon. However, the executing Court ordered issuance of attachment of the immovable property without conducting any enquiry under Order XXI Rule 58. 9. This Court is of the opinion that when any such application is filed, the concerned Court should have proceeded to pass orders and thereafter, upon dealing with the said application, proceed further in the execution process either for sale or attachment of the immovable property or otherwise. Having not done so, I am inclined to accept the petition of the petitioner to the limited extent of issuing the direction to the executing Court to dispose of the application filed by the petitioner expeditiously and in accordance with law. 10. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is disposed of. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9040 WP No. 104906 of 2025 (ii) The executing Court is hereby directed to dispose of the application filed by the petitioner expeditiously, in accordance with law and the provisions of CPC. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE RHR/- List No.: 3 Sl No.: 20