- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32110 WP No. 14939 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 14939 OF 2020 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: S R SOMU AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS S/O LATE BUDDA RANGAPPA, R/O 2ND CROSS, KAMAKSHI STREET, SHIVAMOGGA-577201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHIDAMBARA G S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT C D NALINAKSHI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS W/O LATE C.H.NAGESH 2. ANISH AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS S/O LATE C.H.NAGESH 3. AYUSH AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS S/O LATE C.H.NAGESH RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 WERE SINCE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR GRANDMOTHER SMT CHIKKAMMA, W/O DODDEGOWDA Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32110 WP No. 14939 of 2020 ALL ARE R/O.# 24, MAILARY KRUPA, JAYADEVA EXTENSION, ALKOLA, SHIVAMOGGA CITY-577204. 4. KARNATAKA BANK LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED AND HEAD OFFICE AT MANGALORE AND ONE OF ITS BRANCH AT SAVALANGA ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA-577201. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER A.G.RAJESH. 5. SMT. JABEENA KOUSAR M.N W/O RIYAZ AHMED K AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT GOPALA GOWDA BADAVANE, “B” BLOCK, II CROSS, SHIVAMOGGA-577201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C.S.SATISH, ADVOCATE FOR R-4; SRI H.S. PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R-5; R-1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED V/O DATED 15.09.2023 NOTICE TO R-2 & R-3 ARE H/S) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE APPROPRIATE WRIT OR WRITS SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06.02.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT SHOVAMOGGA IN OS NO.125/2017 ON IA NO.8 AND PASS APPROPRIATE CONSEQUENTIAL ORDERS DISMISSING THE SAID APPLICATION FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32110 WP No. 14939 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the Order dated 06.02.2020 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM at Shivamogga in O.S.No.125/2017 on I.A.No.VIII filed under Order XXXVIII Rule 8 read with Section 151 of CPC, for recalling the order of attachment with respect to schedule property. 2. Heard Sri.Chidambara.G.S, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.C.S.Satish, learned counsel for Respondent No.4 and Sri.H.S.Prashanth, learned counsel for Respondent No.5. Respondent No.1 though served, remained unrepresented. 3. The suit is filed by plaintiff for recovery of money. By order dated 26.07.2017, learned Trial Judge passed a conditional order of attachment of the schedule property before Judgment subject to defendants furnishing security for the suit claim of Rs.6,00,000/-. An application I.A.No.8 was filed by Defendant No.4 for recalling the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32110 WP No. 14939 of 2020 order dated 26.07.2017. By order dated 06.02.2020, the conditional order of attachment was recalled. 4. When the matter came up before this Court, by order dated 17.12.2020, interim stay was granted, which was being extended until 13.09.2024. Thereafter, learned counsel for the petitioner sought for time on the ground that there was a likelihood of settlement. By order dated 24.07.2025, the matter was referred to Karnataka Mediation Centre, Bengaluru under Special Mediation Drive by the High Court of Karnataka. The matter came up for Mediation and the parties have filed a Joint Memo dated 07.08.2025. The Karnataka Mediation Centre, Bengaluru has sent the letter dated 18.08.2025 along with Mediation Report and agreement and photo copies of the writ petition. The terms of the Joint memo reads as under: VI. The auction purchaser/impleading applicant agrees and undertakes to pay the said sum of Rs.3,60,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only) to the plaintiff/petitioner by way of demand draft before the Hon'ble Court at the time of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32110 WP No. 14939 of 2020 recording settlement. Henceforth the petitioner/plaintiff does not have any right or claim whatsoever against the impleading applicant/auction purchaser in respect of the property in question. VII. It is made clear explicitly that the present agreement binds the plaintiff/petitioner and the proposed respondent No.5/impleading applicant before this Hon'ble Court. The plaintiff/petitioner makes it clear that he does not lay any claim against proposed respondent No.5. before any forum with respect to the cause of action urged in the suit in O.S.No.125/2017 and he would prosecute the case against the Respondents/defendants 1 to 3 before the concerned trial Court in accordance with law. VIII. In view of the aforesaid agreement entered into between the parties, the parties pray that this Hon'ble High Court be pleased to pass appropriate order allowing the impleading application and consequently dispose off the Writ Petition in terms of this agreement. IX. Parties shall appear before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka for passing necessary orders in terms of the agreement whenever the matter is listed before the Hon'ble Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32110 WP No. 14939 of 2020 5. Accordingly, as per the settlement arrived at between the parties, Respondent No.5 has produced a demand draft for Rs.3,60,000/- and the handed over the same to the petitioner before the Court. 6. Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Mediation dated 18.08.2025. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not make any claim against Respondent No.5 in respect of same cause of action. Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE BNV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1