01Facts
The petitioners filed five writ petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging orders dated 21 April 2023 by which the XVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, allowed applications under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC in several execution proceedings.
pp. 6, 11, 15–16, 20–21, 25On 12 October 2026, counsel for the petitioners filed memos seeking permission to dismiss the petitions as not pressed.
p. 2602Issues
i.Whether the writ petitions should be dismissed as not pressed in light of the petitioners’ memos.
p. 26ii.Whether the merits of the challenge to the orders allowing applications under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC required determination.
p. 2603Law Applied
Article 227 of the Constitution was invoked to challenge the execution court’s orders, and Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC was the provision under which the challenged applications had been allowed.
pp. 6, 11, 15–16, 20–21The High Court did not state or apply any substantive rule concerning either provision; it acted on the petitioners’ request to withdraw the petitions as not pressed.
p. 2604Reasoning
The Court recorded that the petitioners had filed memos seeking dismissal of the petitions as not pressed and took those memos on record.
p. 26It therefore did not examine the legality of the execution court’s orders or decide any question concerning the application of Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC or the scope of Article 227.
05Holding
The Court accepted the memos and dismissed all five writ petitions as not pressed.
p. 26The challenged orders were not reviewed on their merits.
p. 26Original Court PDF
SRI SRINIVASvsSRI R VENKATESH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
