- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32039 WP No. 31394 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 31394 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: DR. P. VIJAYAKUMAR S/O LATE C PERAIAH SINCE DECEASED BY LRS 1. DR. ASHA S. W/O. LATE DR. P. VIJAYAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS 2. DR. ANKITA V. D/O. LATE DR. P. VIJAYAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS 3. DR. AVINASH V. S/O. LATE DR. VIJAYAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.1210 1ST MAIN, 1ST STAGE, 3RD BLOCK H.B.R. LAYOUT BANGALORE - 560 043 AMENDMENT CARIED OUT ON 02.06.2026 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AMARESH A. ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR PROPOSED LRS OF DECEASED PETITIONER) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32039 WP No. 31394 of 2019 AND: SRI M N BAIG S/O SRI NOORULLA BAIG AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT FLAT NO.301 OPAL NEST, NO.52, ROBERTSON ROAD, FRAZER TOWN BANGALORE - 560 005 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. N. GURUMURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. D.R. SUNDARESHA, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN EXECUTION CASE NO.3547/2016 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE COURT OF XIX ADDL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CCH NO.18, BANGALORE CITY ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 11.07.2019 passed in Execution Case No.3547/2016 by the XIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, CCH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32039 WP No. 31394 of 2019 No.18, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as the 'Executing Court' for short). 2. Heard Sri Amaresh A. Angadi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri N. Gurumurthy, learned counsel on behalf of Sri. D. R. Sundaresha, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. The respondent has filed a suit for recovery of money against the petitioner herein for a sum of Rs.59,48,533/-. The Trial Court decreed the suit for a sum of Rs.13,50,000/- along with interest at the rate of 24% per annum from 28.04.2003 i.e., the date of the Joint Development Agreement, till the date of filing of the suit and further interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realisation of the decretal amount. It is not in dispute that the decretal amount is Rs.13,50,000/- together with interest at 24% per annum from the date of the agreement till the date of filing of the suit and thereafter at 12% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till the date of realisation. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32039 WP No. 31394 of 2019 4. The petitioner/judgment debtor has contended that pursuant to the directions issued in RFA.No.191/2014, he has deposited a sum of Rs.13,50,000/- on 02.04.2014. Thereafter, a further sum of Rs.9,72,000/- was deposited on 03.08.2016 in O.S.No.4439/2006. It is further contended that during the execution proceedings, the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.12,96,000/-. As per the calculation of the petitioner, he has no dues to be paid. 5. A perusal of the memo of calculation filed by the respondent/decree holder, however, indicates that certain amounts are still due. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out the memo of calculation extracted in paragraph No.16 of the writ petition, which indicates the aforesaid narration of facts. The contention of the learned counsel for the judgment debtor is that the decree holder has erred in calculating interest at the rate of 24% per annum for 37 months and 12% per annum as well. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32039 WP No. 31394 of 2019 6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and the memo of calculation extracted in paragraph No.16 of the writ petition, I am of the considered view that the Executing Court has not dealt with these aspects while passing the impugned order. Hence, it would be appropriate to direct the Executing Court to reconsider the memo of calculation afresh. The petitioner as well as the respondent are permitted to file fresh memos of calculation indicating the amounts paid, received, and, if any, still payable. 7. With the aforesaid observations, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 11.07.2019 passed in Execution Case No.3547/2016 by the XIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, CCH No.18, Bengaluru is hereby set aside. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32039 WP No. 31394 of 2019 iii) The decree holder as well as judgment debtor shall file fresh memos of calculation before the Execution Court. Upon receipt of the same, the Execution Court shall reconsider the matter and proceed in accordance with law. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE SHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25