- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45575 CRP No. 107 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 107 OF 2022 (EX) BETWEEN: SRI BHARATH KUMAR S/O SRI BHAVAR LAL AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS SHOP NO.1, MAHAVEER TIME AND TELECOM GROUND FLOOR, NO. 339, OTC ROAD, CHICKPET BANGALORE- 560 053 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAGHUNATH M D, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S KARNATAKA VEERASHAIVA VIDYABHIVRUDHI SAMSTHE NO.18, SJM TOWERS SESHADRI ROAD, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 009 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SRI. M. SHIVANNA S/O LATE SRI. MARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS …RESPONDENT (BY SRI MOHAN S, ADVOCATE) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02.11.2021 PASSED ON I.A. IN EX.NO.774/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE (SCCH-11), DISMISSING THE I.A. FILED UNDER SECTION 47 OF CPC, R/W ORDER 21 RULE 97 OF CPC. Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45575 CRP No. 107 of 2022 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Raghunath M.D., learned counsel for the petitioner appeared through Video Conferencing. None appears for the respondent. 2. The judgment debtor is the revision petitioner challenging the dismissal of the application filed under Section 47 r/w Order 21 Rule 97 of Code of Civil Procedure with costs of Rs.500/-. 3. Facts which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are as under: 4. Judgment Debtor suffered a decree of ejectment. In order to execute the said decree, Decree Holder filed execution petition in Execution Case No.774/2020. 5. There was an obstruction caused by the Judgment debtor stating that in the ejectment proceedings in S.C.No.1762/2016 wrong door number has been shown by the plaintiff and thereby Judgment Debtor had to surrender the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45575 CRP No. 107 of 2022 possession in the guise that he is surrendering the possession of the property as is mentioned in the plaint. But later on he came to know that plaintiff has made a mischief. He filed an application under Section 47 r/w Order XXI Rule 97 CPC. 6. Learned judge in the Executing Court on contest dismissed the said application. 7. Being aggrieved by the same, present revision petition is filed. 8. Sri M.D. Raghunath learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, vehemently contented that mischief played by the Decree Holder if allowed would perpetuate the illegality and therefore sought for allowing the revision petition. 9. It is settled principles of law and requires no emphasis that Executing Court cannot go behind the decree. All that the Executing Court is required to do is to execute the decree that has been passed unless it is a case which falls under Section 47 r/w Order XXI Rule 97 of CPC. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45575 CRP No. 107 of 2022 10. In the case on hand no such fraudulent aspects are forthcoming and if there is a mistake of fact that has occurred, the Judgment Debtor may file appropriate proceedings and then get back the possession of the property by resorting to Section 144 of CPC. 11. With that liberty for the Judgment Debtor, following order is passed: ORDER (i) Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. (ii) No order as to costs. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR