Karnataka High Court
WP/28042/2026 of MR. SURAJ B S Vs MR. VIJAYKUMAR A on 7 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010619682026 NC: 2026:KHC:48240 WP No. 28042 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 28042 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. MR. SURAJ B S AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O B.S
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
WRIT PETITION NO. 28042 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1.
MR. SURAJ B S
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
S/O B.S SRINIVASAMURTHY,
RESIDING AT
NO.1/12, 3RD CROSS,
MOUNT JOY EXTENSION,
BEHIND CANARA BANK,
HANUMANTHANAGARA,
BENGALURU - 560019.
2.
B.S SRINIVASAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS,
S/O B SURAIAH SHETTY,
NO.1/12, 3RD CROSS,
MOUNT JOY EXTENSION,
BEHIND CANARA BANK,
HANUMANTHANAGARA,
BENGALURU - 560019.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI AJAY KADKOL T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
MR. VIJAYKUMAR A
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
S/O LATE PUNYAKOTI REDDY,
R/A NO.25, BEHIND SPURTHI HOSPITAL,
CHOCOLATE FACTORY ROAD,
Digitally
signed by
VINUTHA B S
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
TAVAREKERE,
BENGALURU - 560029
2.
MR.B.N RAVINDRA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
S/O LATE NARAYANA REDDY,
R/A BALAGERE VILLAGE,
PANATHUR POST, VARTHUR HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK,
BENGALURU-560087.
3.
MR.N VENKATA RAMANA
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS,
S/O N THIPPANNAM,
R/A NO.D-9, WEST TRINITY ACRES,
SARJAPURA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560102.
4.
MRS.NAGA MALLIKA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
D/O N VENKATA RAMANA
R/A FLAT NO.401,
K.V MEADOWS, 13TH CROSS,
VENKATAPURA EXTENSION,
BENGALURU - 560034.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S. KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE
ORDER DATED 22.07.2026 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL AT BENGALURU ON IA NO.5
FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 HEREIN UNDER ORDER XXI
RULE 53(A) R/W ORDER XXI RULES 1 AND 2 OF THE CODE OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE IN CASE IN EX.NO 45 OF 2023 BY WHICH
ORDER THE TRIAL JUDGE HAS DIRECTED THE ATTACHMENT OF
THE PROPERTY BELONGING TO THE PETITIONERS HEREIN, WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE - B.
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
Heard Sri.Ajay Kadkol T., learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. S. Krishnaswamy, learned counsel for respondent No.1-caveator.
2. This petition impugns the order dated 22.07.2026, whereby a warrant of attachment has been issued in respect of the property bearing Survey No.162 of Doddathougur Village, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk to the extent of 5 guntas. The petitioners claim to be the purchasers of 4 guntas of land out of the larger extent of 12 guntas. The building constructed over the extent of 4 guntas forms part of the larger extent of 12 guntas.
3. It is submitted that the dispute in the execution petition is confined to an extent of 5 guntas. However, the warrant of attachment has been erroneously enforced against
HC-KAR
the extent of 4 guntas, which has no connection with the dispute between the parties in the execution proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 submits that the writ petition is not maintainable in law in view of Order XXI Rule 101 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'CPC'), under which the petitioners have an opportunity to file an application raising their objections before the Executing Court.
5. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
6. The dispute raised by the petitioners in the present petition requires detailed consideration, as it involves the identification of the property. Such an exercise cannot be undertaken in the present petition. However, the petitioners have an alternative and efficacious remedy under Order XXI Rule 101 of CPC. Pending adjudication of the objections to be raised under Order XXI Rule 101 of CPC, the nature and rights in respect of the properties are required to be preserved.
HC-KAR
7. In that view of the matter, there shall be a stay of the execution of the warrant of attachment until the adjudication of the application to be filed by the petitioners under Order XXI Rule 101 of CPC. It is submitted that such application shall be filed within two weeks from today.
8. In view of the above, subject to the cooperation of the parties, the Executing Court shall endeavour to adjudicate the application within a period of six months from the date of filing of the application. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE
VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17