- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4677 WP No. 114520 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 114520 OF 2015 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SAVAKKA KOM SHIVAPPA MAJATI, AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: DADABANATTI, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. SHRI. NINGAPPA S/O SHIVAPPA MAJATI, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DADABANATTI, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. SHRI. SIDDAPPA S/O SHIVAPPA MAJATI, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DADABANATTI, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 4. SHRI. NIRVANI D/O SHIVAPPA MAJATI, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DADABANATTI, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 5. SHRI. BHIMAPPA S/O SHIVAPPA MAJATI, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DADABANATTI, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 6. SHRI. BASAVANNI D/O SHIVAPPA MAJATI, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DADABANATTI, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SURAJ.M.KATAGI., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. V.G.BHAT., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4677 WP No. 114520 of 2015 AND: 1. SMT. MAHADEVI RUDRAPPA REVANNAVAR, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HANCHINALA, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. SMT. VASUNDHRA KOM IRANNA URF IRAPPA MAJATI, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: DADABANATTI, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. SHRI. KALLAPPA IERANNA URF IERAPPA MAJATI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DADABANATTI, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 4. SMT. GOURVVA KENPANNA BADARYAPPAGOUL AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HONNAPUR, TQ: DIST: DHARWAD. 5. SHRI. SURESH S/O SHIVAPPA MAJATI, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DADABANATTI, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAMESH.I.ZIRALI., ADVOCATE FOR R2 & 5; SRI. CHETHANKUMAR.R.PUJARI., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. DINESH.M.KULKARNI., ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4677 WP No. 114520 of 2015 ORAL ORDER Sri.Suraj M.Katagi., counsel on behalf of Sri.V.G.Bhat., for the petitioners, Sri.Ramesh I.Zirali., counsel for respondents 2 and 5 and Sri.Chetan Kumar.R. Pujari., counsel on behalf of Sri.Dinesh M.Kulkarni., for respondent No.3 have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated 05.01.2007 passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) Shankeshwara in Execution Petition No.90/2006 vide Annexure-D and consequently, restore the same. 3. The short facts are these: The petitioners are the judgment debtors and the respondents are the decree holders. The plaintiffs filed a suit seeking the relief of partition and the Trial Court vide judgment dated 05.07.1989 decreed the suit. The final decree proceedings were initiated in FDP No.2/2002. The FDP came to be disposed of on 04.01.2006. The execution petition was filed in No.90/2006. The petitioners contend that they were placed ex-parte before the executing Court. The Executing Court on - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4677 WP No. 114520 of 2015 05.01.2007 closed the execution proceedings. Under these circumstances, the petitioners filed the present Writ Petition on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 4. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 5. The issue revolves around a narrow compass and relates to the closing of the execution proceedings. The petitioners contend that they were placed ex-parte in the execution case. Their grievance is about the closure of the execution case; hence, they are seeking restoration. A true copy of the portion of the order sheet in Execution Petition No.90/2006 is furnished along with the Writ Petition and the same is marked as Annexure-D. A perusal of the same would reflect that on 23.09.2006, the judgment debtors were placed ex-parte. Thereafter, taking note of the Court Commissioner's report, the execution petition was closed on 05.01.2007. The petitioners were placed ex-parte back in 2006 and the execution petition was closed back in 2007. However, the Writ Petition was filed in 2015. There is an inordinate - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4677 WP No. 114520 of 2015 almost eight years. The Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed on the grounds of delay and laches. The petitioners ought to have taken recourse by approaching the proper forum under Order 21 Rule 106 within thirty days. This has not been done. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be rejected. 6. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is rejected. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 49