- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:739 WP No. 107198 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.107198 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. BASAVARAJ S/O. YELLAPPA MALAGI @ MALAPUR, AGE. 39 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SALAKINAKOPPA-580118, TQ. / DIST. DHARWAD. 2. YALLAPPA S/O. SHIVARUDRAPPA MALAPUR, AGE. 68 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SALAKINAKOPPA-580118, TQ. / DIST. DHARWAD. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A.NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE) AND: NAVEEN S/O. NAGAPPA NAGARAJ KOLHAPUR, AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT AND BARBER, R/O. SALAKINAKOPPA-580118, TQ. / DIST. DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SABEEL AHMED, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 20.09.2025 IN EX. CASE NO.107/2025 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, DHARWAD AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,. Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:739 WP No. 107198 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:’ CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in Execution Case No.107/2025 dated 20.09.2025 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Dharwad, the judgment-debtors (hereinafter referred to as “JDRs”) are before this Court. 2. The respondent herein has filed Execution Case No.107/2025 with a prayer to attach the landed properties belonging to the JDRs, as the JDRs are evading the payment of compensation amount and they are not ready to comply with the decree passed by the Trial Court as well as High Court in MFA No.101625/2017. 3. The application filed by the Decree Holder is resisted by the JDRs stating that the application is not maintainable as there is no iota of evidence on record to show that the JDRs have not complied with the award passed by the Court of law. The decree holder has filed application directly seeking attachment of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:739 WP No. 107198 of 2025 the property without exhausting other available modes. Hence, the application deserves to be rejected. 4. The Court, by order impugned, had allowed the application and while allowing the application, has observed that the seriousness of objection as raised by the JDR No.2 itself indicates that he is not ready to satisfy the decree. Per contra, it is the apprehension of the decree holder that the property stands in the name of the JDR No.2 is only a source for satisfying the award and same is not attached and if the property is disposed off, it will affect the right of the decree holder. The Court has observed that the property now intended to be attached stands in the name of the JDR No.2. If the said land is not attached and if the JDR No.2 disposes off the same, certainly it would affect the right of the decree holder. The JDRs have not filed any affidavit stating that they have no such intention to transfer the property in favour of third parties or create any right or interest of third parties or they have no intention to create charge over the said property and accordingly Court had allowed the application. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:739 WP No. 107198 of 2025 5. Initially, when this matter came up before Co- ordinate Bench of this Court, an order was passed on 26.09.2025, which reads as below: “1. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks for and is granted a week's time to file an affidavit indicating the amount that would be deposited by the petitioner and in what manner. 2. Re-list on 10.10.2025. 3. Until then, the operation of the order dated 20.09.2025 in Ex.No.107 of 2025 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Dharwad is stayed. 4. If necessary and proper affidavit indicating reasonable time frame for payment of reasonable amount is not made by next date, the interim order would be liable to be vacated.” 6. The interim order came to be extended from time to time. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the client is not in touch as such they could not file an affidavit. It is further submitted that the Executing Court has failed to consider the contentions raised on behalf of the JDRs and within a very short time, the execution proceedings were closed and no reasonable opportunity was given to the JDRs. As such, the order impugned needs to be set aside. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:739 WP No. 107198 of 2025 7. The learned counsel appearing for the decree holder submits that in spite of an order passed by this court, the petitioners have not filed any affidavit. Even the Executing Court has also observed about the bona fides of the petitioners. It is submitted that there are no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the Executing Court. 8. Having heard the counsel on either side, perused the material on record. 9. When a judgment and decree has attained finality, it is the duty of the JDRs to honour the decree and cannot find fault with any application that is filed by the decree holder. No law specifies that first the petitioners have to exhaust one remedy and then have to take up the other remedy available to them. Even before this Court also the petitioners have not come up with any affidavit, when they are going to pay the decreetal amount and in spite of giving a reasonable opportunity, have also not filed the affidavit. In these circumstances, in the considered opinion of the Court, the petitioners are not entitled for any relief from this Court and the Executing Court had rightly passed an order. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:739 WP No. 107198 of 2025 ORDER (i) The writ petition is dismissed. (ii) All I.As., in this writ petition stand closed. Sd/- JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI YAN CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 96