1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

WRIT PETITION NO.32318 OF 2017 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SURESH KUMAR RAMSISARIA,

PROP. SHYAM PLASTIC CONSULTANTS,

HAVING HIS REGISTERED OFFICE AT

ARCHANA COMPLEX, # 37/12-1,

4TH CROSS, LALBAGH ROAD,

BANGALORE – 560 027.

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PARAS JAIN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE COURT OF THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE BANGALORE (CCH 18)

CITY CIVIL COURT COMPLEX,

AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

BANGALORE – 560 009.

REP BY ITS REGISTRAR

2 . SMT. INDIRA,

W/O. MR. M.A. VENKAT,

PROPRIETERIX,

M/S ARUTHJYOTHI WOVEN BAG INDUSTRIES,

HAVING OFFICE AT: NO.55-E,

ASHTALAKSHMI APARTMENTS,

1ST AVENUE, 100 FEET ROAD,

ASHOK NAGAR, CHENNAI - 600 083.

AND THEIR FACTORY AT PLOT NO.821/25,

PIPDIC, ELECTRONIC PARK, THIRUBANAI,

MANNADIPET, KOMMUNE,

PONDICHERRY 605 107.

2

3 . UNION BANK OF INDIA,

T. NAGAR BRANCH,

NO. 96, G.N. CHETTY ROAD,

CHENNAI - 600 017,

REP BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER.

4 . THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD

CTS NO. 11, 1^ST FLOOR,

KEMPEGOWDA MAHARAJA COMPLEX,

K.G. ROAD, BANGALORE 560 009,

REP BY ITS MANAGER

5 . THE TAMILNAD MERCHANTILE BANL LTD

BANGALORE CITY BRANCH,

NO.19-F, ABHINAY THEATRE COMPLEX,

B.V.K. IYENGER ROAD,

BANGALORE - 560 009.

REP BY ITS MANAGER

6 . MR. M.A. VENKAT,

GENERAL MANAGER,

M/S ARUTHJYOTHI WOVEN BAG INDUSTRIES,

HAVING OFFICE AT: NO.55-E,

ASHTALAKSHMI APARTMENTS,

1ST AVENUE, 100 FEET ROAD,

ASHOK NAGAR, CHENNAI – 600 083.

AND THEIR FACTORY AT PLOT NO.821/25,

PIPDIC, ELECTRONIC PARK,

THIRUBANAI, MANNADIPET, KOMMUNE,

PONDICHERRY - 605 107

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. KIRAN KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1;

NOTICE TO R2 – R6 ARE D/WITH V/O DTD 10/08/2017)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE

ORDER PASSED ON I.A.3 IN EXECUTION CASE NUMBER

2735/2016 DATED 16.6.2017 AT ANNEX-D; ALLOW THE

APPLICATION FILED UNDER SEC. 46 OF CPC AND DIRECT THE

3

LEARNED CITY CIVIL JUDGE BANGALORE TO ISSUE PRECEPT

ALONG WITH ATTACHMENT WARRANT AS PRAYED FOR AND

ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Petitioner being the decree holder in Ex.No.2735/2015

is knocking at the doors of the Writ Court for assailing the

order dated 16.06.2017, a copy whereof is at Annexure-D

whereby the Court below has rejected not only his application

in I.A.No.3 filed under Section 46 of CPC seeking issuance of

the precept but has closed the very execution proceeding

itself.

2.

First respondent is represented by the learned

High Court Government Pleader Sri. Kiran Kumar and notice

to other respondents has been dispensed with vide order

dated 10.08.2017 made by a Co-ordinate Judge of this Court.

3.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

and having perused the petition papers, this Court is inclined

to grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as the Court

4

below is not justified in closing the very execution

proceedings and rejecting petitioner’s application in I.A.No.3

for issuance of precept since the execution proceedings are

instituted before the very Court which has entered the decree

in question, the subject property being situate outside its

territorial jurisdiction, notwithstanding.

4. The Apex court in SUNDARAM FINANCE LIMITED

VS. ABDUL SAMAD AND ANOTHER, (2018) 3 SCC 622 at

para 11 has observed as under:

“11. Now turning to the provisions of Order XXI of

the said Code, which deals with execution of

decrees and orders. In case a Court desires that its

own decree is to be executed by another court, the

manner for doing so is provided by Rule 6, which

reads as under:

“Order XXI – Execution of Decrees and Orders xxxx

xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

6. Procedure where court desires that its own

de