SRI DURGAPPA vs SRI. HANAMANTARAYA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11354
WP No. 200056 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030122922025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 14 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
WRIT PETITION NO. 200056 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. DURGAPPA S/O LATE AJAPPA,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRIL,
R/O BASANTPUR VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA,
DIST. RAICHUR.
2. SRI. BUSAPPA S/O HANUMANTHA,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRIL,
R/O BASANTPUR VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA,
DIST. RAICHUR-584101.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHARANABASAPPA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
SHIVALEELA D
UDAGI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
SRI. HANAMANTARAYA
S/O NARASAPPA,
AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: DEFENCE SERVICE,
R/O BASANTPUR VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA,
DIST. RAICHUR-586101
NOW RESIDING AT AMARNATH TOWN,
DIST THANE, MAHARASTRA-400601.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. BASAVARAJ NADGOUDA, ADVOCATE)

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11354
WP No. 200056 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030122922025
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) A
WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 25.06.2025 ON IA NO.3 IN EP NO.14/2022 PASSED BY
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT DEVADURGA VIDE
ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN “B” GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
ORAL ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“THIS writ petition is filed under articles 226 and 227 of
the constitution of india, PRAYING TO issue a) A writ in
the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated
25.06.2025 on IA No.3 in EP No.14/2022 passed by the
Senior Civil JUDGE and JMFC at Devadurga vide
ANNEXURE-F, b) Any type of writ or order may be
pleased as deemed fit under fact and circumstance of
case in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. The Respondent had filed O.S.No.104/2005 on
the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC-I, at
Raichur on 21.01.2011 for the relief of declaration that the
Respondent/Plaintiff is the absolute owner and in
possession of the suit schedule properties. The Petitioners
contested the suit as Defendants; the Trial Court decreed

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11354
WP No. 200056 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030122922025
the suit and declared the Respondent/Plaintiff the absolute
owner and in possession of the suit schedule properties.
Consequently, the Trial Court restrained the
Petitioners/Defendants by way of permanent injunction
from interfering with the peaceful possession and
enjoyment of the Suit Schedule Property.
3. The Respondent/Plaintiff preferred the
Execution Petition No.14/2022 before the Senior Civil
Judge and JMFC at Devadurga, seeking the execution of
the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.104/2005
dated 21.01.2011. During the pendency of the Execution
Petition, the Petitioners herein filed Regular Appeal
No.46/2024 before the Principal District and Sessions
Judge, Raichur, challenging the judgment and decree
passed in O.S.No.104/2005 dated 21.01.2011. The
Petitioner No.1 has thereafter filed I.A.No.III/2025 in
execution proceedings under Order XXI Rule 29 R/w.Sec.
151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking a stay of the
execution proceedings pending disposal of the Regular

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11354
WP No. 200056 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030122922025
Appeal No. 46/2024 filed by the Petitioners. The
Respondent, the decree holder, filed objections to the said
application on the ground that the Appellate Court has not
stayed the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court
in the pending R.A. No. 46/2024. The Executing Court,
considering the contentions advanced by the Decree
Holder and the Judgment Debtors, i.e., the Respondent
and the Petitioners herein, rejected the said application on
25.06.2025, observing that the judgment debtors, i.e.,
petitioners herein, have not made out any ground for stay
of the execution proceedings. The present proceedings
impugn the order of the Executing Court dated
25.06.2025.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners
and the learned counsel for the respondent and perused
the materials on record.
5. Undisputedly, the suit filed by the Respondent
herein in O.S.No.104/2005 for the relief of declaration and

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11354
WP No. 200056 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030122922025
permanent injunction was decreed by the Court of the
Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC-I at Raichur, by
judgment and decree dated 21.01.2011. The Decree
Holder, i.e., the Respondent herein, filed Execution
Petition No.14/2022 before the Senior Civil Judge and
JMFC at Devadurga, seeking execution of the judgment
and decree passed in O.S.No.104/2005 dated 21.01.2011.
Admittedly, when the Respondent herein, being the decree
holder, initiated execution proceedings, the petitioners
herein had not filed any Appeal assailing the judgment and
decree passed in O.S.No.104/2005 dated 21.01.2011. The
Respondent filed an Execution Petition in 2022, and the
Petitioners subsequently filed R.A.No.46/2024 challenging
the judgment and decree dated 21.01.2011 in
O.S.No.104/2005.
6. In the meantime, the Petitioner No.1 filed
I.A.No.III before the Executing Court seeking stay of
further proceedings in the Execution Petition, contending
that the Regular Appeal has been preferred and the same

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11354
WP No. 200056 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030122922025
is pending adjudication, and till the conclusion of the
Appeal proceedings the Execution proceedings are to be
deferred. The Executing Court, considering the application
and the Respondent's objections, rejected the application,
holding that the Petitioners have not made out any case
for staying further proceedings. The Executing Court
indicated that, by virtue of the judgment and decree
passed in O.S.No.104/2005, the Respondent is declared
the absolute owner of the suit schedule property and, as
such, the further proceedings in the execution cannot be
stayed.
7. It is essential to consider that the Regular
Appeal filed by the Petitioners herein in R.A.No.46/2024
challenging the judgment and decree passed in
O.S.No.104/2005 dated 21.01.2011 was subsequently
dismissed on the ground of inordinate delay of 16 years
227 days in presenting R.A.No.46/2024. The Appellate
Court refused to condone the delay of 16 years 227 days
in filing R.A.No.46/2024; consequently, it dismissed the

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11354
WP No. 200056 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030122922025
appeal on the ground of delay. Since the Appellate Court
dismissed the Regular Appeal filed by the Petitioners
herein in R.A.No.46/2024 by order dated 30.08.2025, the
Executing Court is not impeded from proceeding further in
the matter for execution of the judgment and decree
passed in O.S.No.104/2005 dated 21.01.2011.
8. The dismissal of the Regular Appeal has not
been disputed by the Petitioners, and the Petitioners have
also not brought to the notice of this Court whether any
Second Appeal is preferred and the grant of stay of the
judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. In that
view, the Executing Court has committed no error in
rejecting the application filed by the petitioners herein
seeking a stay of further proceedings in the Execution. The
Executing Court's order rejecting the application is neither
perverse nor illegal; accordingly, the present Petition is
liable to be dismissed as bereft of merit.

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11354
WP No. 200056 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030122922025
9. Hence, the Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER
dismissed
i. The Writ Petition is hereby .
Sd/-
(SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO)
JUDGE
AMA
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23
CT:SI