- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27017 RSA No. 446 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.446 OF 2022 (RES) BETWEEN: M/S TELECOM EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED NO.23, 1ST FLOOR NEHRUNAGARA MAIN ROAD BENGALURU -560 020 REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI MANJUNATHA C V …APPELLANT (BY SRI SAMPATH A, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI E S SRISHILAN AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS S/O LATE EMBAR SRINIVASACHAR 2. SRI E S KRISHNA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE EMBAR SRINIVASACHAR 3. SMT. KAMALA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS D/O LATE EMBAR SRINIVASACHAR Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27017 RSA No. 446 of 2022 4. SRI E S VENKATARANGAN AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O LATE EMBAR SRINIVASACHAR 5. SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, D/O LATE EMBAR SRINIVASACHAR RESPONDENT No.1 TO 5 ARE R/AT NO.22, SESHADRI ROAD GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU -560009 6. SMT. EMBAR PADMA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, W/O LATE EMBAR SRINIVASACHAR R/AT NO.22, SESHADRI ROAD GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 009 7. SRI CHITHAPPA MAJOR S/O LATE CHIKKA ARASAPPA 8. SRI RAMESH MAJOR S/O LATE CHIKKA PATALAPPA 9. SRI SIDDESH MAJOR S/O LATE CHIKKA PATALAPPA 10. SRI SHIVAKUMAR MAJOR S/O LATE CHIKKA PATALAPPA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27017 RSA No. 446 of 2022 11. SRI SINGARAPPA MAJOR S/O LATE CHIKKA PATALAPPA RESPONDENT No.7 TO 11 ARE R/AT BETTENAHALLI VILLAGE KUNDANA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562110 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI CHANDRANATH ARIGA K, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5; SRI CHOKKAREDDY, ADVOCATE FOR PROPOSED APPLICANT NOS.12 TO 20) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.10.2018 PASSED IN O.S.No.290/1994 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DEVANAHALLI AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.290/1994 wherein suit was decreed partly and the same was challenged before the First - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27017 RSA No. 446 of 2022 Appellate Court and the First Appellate Court also confirmed the judgment and decree of the Trial Court and as against the said concurrent finding of both the Courts, this second appeal is filed before this Court. 2. The counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5 submits that the decree granted by the Trial Court and confirmed by the First Appellate Court is already enforced by filing a execution petition and possession was also delivered on 01.10.2024 and after the delivery of the possession, some of the applicants have filed an application before the executing Court as objectors and the execution petition is pending for consideration. The counsel would further submitted that when the judgment and decree was already enforced by filing an execution petition and possession is also restored, nothing is there to decide in this second appeal. 3. To this submission, the learned counsel for the appellant would vehemently contend that earlier there was - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27017 RSA No. 446 of 2022 a grant and same was set aside by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the writ petition and the said order was also questioned in the writ appeal and the said writ appeal was also got dismissed and as against the dismissal of the writ appeal, a case is filed before the Apex Court and the Apex Court yet to consider the same. 4. The learned counsel for the impleading applicants submits that they have already filed an application before the executing Court claiming that they are the purchasers of the sites which are formed by the appellant herein. When possession was delivered in favour of respondent Nos.1 to 5, the very delivery of possession is questioned and the matter is pending before the executing Court for consideration of the same and date is fixed as 02.08.2025. 5. In reply to the said submission, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 5 submits that when the very grant was cancelled by the order passed by this - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27017 RSA No. 446 of 2022 Court in the writ petition, the appellant has not challenged the same for a period of 7 years and the same was challenged after 7 years by filing a writ appeal and same was also dismissed and there is no order of stay by the Apex Court questioning the same. 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and on perusal of the material on record and also the counter affidavit filed by the counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5, when this second appeal is filed before this Court challenging the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.290/1994 as well as the judgment and decree passed in R.A.No.15021/2019 wherein confirmed the judgment of the Trial Court and same has been enforced by filing a execution petition and possession was already been taken, now, nothing is there to decide in this matter and if any objections are filed by the appellant as well as the impleading applicants before executing Court, let the matter be decided with regard to the validity of delivery of possession as well as objections filed by them. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27017 RSA No. 446 of 2022 Hence, I do not find any ground to continue this appeal when there is no stay order by the Apex Court and already judgment and decree is enforced by filing an execution petition and possession was delivered on 01.10.2024, thus, this second appeal does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 7. In view of dismissal of the appeal, question of impleading the applicants does not arise in this appeal. 8. In view of dismissal of the main appeal, I.A. if any, does not survive for consideration and the same stands dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SN