ORDER

In this petition, petitioner – Judgment Debtor No.2 is aggrieved by the impugned order passed on I.A.No.5 in Ex.No.17/2020 on the file of I Addl.Senior Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, whereby the said application filed by the respondents 1 and 2 – Decree Holders under Section 151 CPC for police protection and attachment of the movables of the petitioner was allowed by the trial court.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondents 1 and 2 instituted the aforesaid execution proceedings seeking enforcement of the judgment and decree dated 10.12.2019 passed in O.S.No.762/2010 by the trial court. The appeal in RFA No.82/2022 has been preferred by the petitioner – appellant, in which, this Court has passed an order dated 28.03.2022 staying judgment and decree dated 10.12.2019 passed by the trial court, subject to the petitioner depositing Rs.50 lakhs before this Court within a period of Eight weeks from that date. The undisputed fact that the petitioner – appellant has not complied with the said order and consequently, there is no stay of the judgment and decree passed by the trial court.

4. In the instant execution proceedings, respondents 1 and 2 filed the instant application seeking police aid / protection and for attachment of the movables for the purpose of implementing and executing the impugned judgment and decree. The said application was not opposed by the petitioner, who did not file any objections to the said application and accordingly, the trial court proceeded to pass the impugned order allowing I.A.5 by holding as under:-

“ By filing the above IA, DHR prays to issue aid of the police to break open the door lock premises of JDRs to attach the movable properties of JDRs.

2. It is submitted that, present execution is filed to recover them one in terms of judgment and decree passed in O. No.762/2010. It is further submitted that, on presentation of present petition, the JDRs have appeared before the court and undertook to settle the matter. It is further submitted that, both parties have settled the dispute and filed joint memo wherein, the JDRs have agreed to pay total sum of Rs.2,05,00,000/- and paid Rs,5,00,000/- before the court. Further, it is submitted that, the JDRs have agreed to pay the remaining amount of Rs.2,00,00,000/- by two installments but, JDRs have ailed to oblige the terms of joint memo. It is further submitted that, the court issued attachment of movables of JDRs. It is further submitted that, warrant to attach the movables of JDRs have been returned as JDRs resisted to execute the same as the premises of JDRs is door lock. It is further submitted that, the court officer sought for police aid to break open the door lock for the purpose of attaching the movable of JDRs. Hence, sought for allow the above.

3.The JDRs failed to file objection to above IA.

4.Perusal material before the court.

5.The case file discloses that, the JDR No.1 agreed as per the joint memo dtd.27.06.2022 to pay the Rs.2,05,00,000/- to the DHRs. The case file further discloses that, out of the agreed amount, JDR No.1 has paid Rs.5,00,000/- to the DHRs but failed to pay the remaining amount of Rs.2,00,00,000/-. The court file discloses that, the attachment warrant issued by the court date 03.06.2022 has been returned by the court officer vide its report dated 18.06.2022 stating that, the premises of JDR is door lock and also necessity of police in executing the warrant of attachment to enforce the decree. Therefore, it is proper to issue police aid in executing the decree as it is well settled position of law that to execute the decree of the court, the court is also empowered to issue direction to the police to aid in execution of decree. In view of the same, court pass the following:

ORDER

I.A.No.5 filed by the DHR U/s.151 of CPC is allowed Consequently, the Sadashivnagar Poli