SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38518

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.NAGAPRASANNA
MANTRI DEVELOPER PVT LTD – Appellant
Versus
MR MUDIT SAXENA – Respondent


CAV ORDER

The petitioner, in the batch of these petitions, is common and the respondents are different. The issue that is projected in these petitions is also common. It is therefore these petitions are taken up together and are considered by this common order.

2. Facts adumbrated are as follows:

The petitioner is the judgment debtor before the Executing Court in different execution petitions pending before the concerned Court. The Execution Petition reaches the Executing Court on a particular circumstance. The respondents, in all these cases, are homebuyers. They approach the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (‘RERA’ for short) seeking certain relief. The RERA passes an order granting certain benefits to the respondents on 30-06-2023 and 03-08-2023 respectively. In order to enforce the orders, the respondents would approach the Civil Court seeking execution of the said order by registering different execution petitions. Before the Executing Court, the petitioner files an application invoking Section 47 of the CPC to terminate the execution proceedings on the score of lack of jurisdiction to execute the decree or the order passed by RERA. The said applications comes to be rejected by t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top