IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 37762 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

RENAISSANCES HOLDINGS AND DEVELOPERS PVT LTD NO. 50, RENAISSANCE LANDMARK

17TH CROSS, 8TH MAIN MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU 560055 REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. SUDHAMA V.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI.SHYAN CHINNAPPA, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. JAYANTH V., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. H S PRAKASH S/O LATE SRI. SHAMANNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS HAL III STAGE, INDIRANGAR 1667, 9TH MAIN Digitally signed by CHANDANA BENGALURU 560 075 B M Location: H igh Court of 2. SRI. H S RAVINDRA Karnataka S/O LATE SRI. SHAMANNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 1667, 9TH MAIN HAL III STAGE, INDIRANGAR BENGALURU 560 075 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. S. NAGANANDINI., ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10-07-2025 PASSED IN EX. PET.NO. 171/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE XLIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, ON IA NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER 21 RULE 29 PCC WHEREBY THE EXECUTION PROCEEDINGS HAVE BEEN STAYED SUBJECT TO THE RESPONDENTS DEPOSITING INR 50 LACS OR FURNISHING A BANK GUARANTEE FOR THE SAID AMOUNT (I.E.

ANNEXURE A)

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

This petition by the petitioner - decree holder in Ex.Pet.No.171/2014 is directed against the impugned order dated 10.07.2025 passed by the XLIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (for short “the Executing Court”), whereby the application, I.A.No.2 filed by the respondents – judgment debtors seeking stay of execution proceedings till disposal of O.S.No.1036/2012 was allowed by the Trial Court.

2. Heard learned Senior 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 the petitioner filed an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in A.A.No.198/2012 against the respondents. In the said proceedings, a compromise was entered into between the petitioners and respondents, pursuant to a compromise petition filed before the court on 07.11. 2012, as a result of which the said A.A.No.198/2012 was allowed in terms of the compromise. The compromise petition filed by the parties reads as under:

“COMPROMISE PETITION UNDER ORDER 23(3)

READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE The parties to the above petition submits the following: Due to the intervention of well wishers, both Parties to the above petition have come forward to settle the matter amicably as per the terms and conditions mentioned below:

a) The Respondents admit and accept the execution of the Agreement of Sale dated 07.07.2011 and also the receipt of Rs.39,32,251/- (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Two Thousand Two Hundred Fifty One only) in all towards part payment of the sale consideration.

b) The Respondents agree and undertake to construct a pucca compound wall surrounding the schedule property before the execution of the Sale Deed as reiterated at Clause 5 of the Agreement of Sale bearing Registration No.2083/2011-12 dated 27.07.2011, Book I stored in CD no KRID 368, within two months time from the date of filing of the Compromise Petition and the Respondents further undertake to execute the sale deed within 30 days from the date of completion of the Compound wall.

The construction of the compound wall is a condition precedent on execution of Sale deed so as to ascertain the correct area available in the schedule property since the rate has been fixed on the basis of sq. feet area.

c) The Respondents undertake to execute absolute Sale Deed in terms of said agreement of sale dated 27.07.2011 within the stipulated time as agreed mutually between the Parties from the date of filing of this compromise petition before the Office of the concerned Sub