Karnataka High Court
R C Lingaraju vs State Bank Of India on 16 October, 2008
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALQRE
DATED THIS THE 16"*rmx OF OCTOBER 25G§
BEFORE
THE HGN'BLE MR. JUSTICE A'SEBOE§E&R _fl
W.P.NO.14206/2007{GH4CPC) Q. '°V
BETWEEN: ' V V
R c LINGARAJU
s/0 CHANNABASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
AGRICULTURIST A_ .
R/OF RAMPURA VILLAGE; V , _ .*, "»
KANAKATTE H03L1;.Ags:KERE TALUK'"~~
HASSAN n:s$RIcr2,j.".;,'. '"'u' »
'>;L..'§ET:r1oNER
(By Sri A v dEN$ADHARA§PA;g§bV;,)
AND:
1
:5sTfi?E"a£NK*o?.:NDIA" """ "
33313332 BRANCH _
RE2REsEN$£B_By~1:5 BRANCH MANAGER
ARSIKERE, 3AssAy'DIsTRIcT
V caANNAEAsAPPA'
'"a_siQ LATE LINGAPPA
T;_KANAgArT£ HOBLI,ARSIKERE TALUK
T1HAssAN DISTRICT
"~K s PRABKAKARA
v s/0 sxnanpyn
° AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
"*AGEE ABOUT 75 YEARS
g* Aeazcunruazsm
R!eF RAMpuRA VILLAGE
AGRICULTURIST
J»
R/OF KADRLAMAGE,
KANAKATTE HOBLI.ARSIKERE TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT .'«
... R3spoNeENIe_y_r,
(By Sri A RAVI SHANKAR, ADV., FOR R1, __
NOTICE TO R-2 & 3 DISPENSER WITH) lo
THIS WP IS FILED pRAY1No"i0"QuAsH,TfiE.ofinfiatz
DT. 7.7.2007 passes BY THE cover :03, THE 'CIYILgA
JUDGE (SR.DN) AT ARSIKERE IN EX;CASE No,189/2302'
A coey or wnxcn IS PRODUCED as Amgaxuna B; __
THIS PETI?ION COMING oh boa PfiL¥;"HEAR1Ne IN
'B' GROUP THIS DAY,THE COUR?--MADEg§HE FGLLOEING :
e
The pé:1;i§n¢§{_:s; before this Court
assailihqitheaoroerfioated 7.7.2097 passed in
Execotion uNoil89/i062. The said order is
h_ impfiqhed at Annerfire-B to the petition.
"r"2. The sfiit filed by respondent No.1~Bank
{herein was decreed in their favour. Pursuant
vtttheratoi since the amount due was not paid by
-Cthe fietitioner herein and respondents 2 and 3
hgherein, who are the guarantors in respect of
the said loan, Ska Execution petition in
I»
No.l89/O2 was initiated by the Bank agaijnLs="t,u
all the Judgment Debtors. Even 7in» théaV
Execution petition, since the amonntsedneCnas_d
not paid, the Executing
further with the matter. xWhen'the matter fies "l
listed on 7.7.2002' since the deoree_nolder
had not pa rt icipatlleda he -- ins where under
the property nelonging to the fiuddnent debtors
was broughtn_tdt_°eele,Vftne Pfisecuting Court
ordered _revisene_ ofh saie_ warrant and sale
proc1emetionfi*for, snot; sale and also for
attachment of selerfi of judgment debtor No.3.
T', The jndgment debtor No.1 has questioned the
sa:1di--dV o.rder._.W
afld7_3{d§hi¢*bourt by an interim order dated
V. l8.i;2008 ordered that the petitioner deposits
Hdtd'§s;5Q,O00/~ and subject to the same, the
lrfqrtner proceedings in the Execution petition
lii"hed been stayed. This Court had specifically
x indicated the date gfr payment and has stated,
0
fl
failing which, the interim order would stand
vacated.
4. Sri A.Ravishankar, learnednucoenselwh
appearing for respondent :No}1¢&:yooidh_stateW
that the said amount had not been de§osited:b§*.
the petitioner . In ea is
needless to mention, since this Court itself
has clarified that ':he.7int§::ng order would
stand vacated} it fiouidshave been open for the
ExecutfinodCourEfito3§roceed with the getter.
However, what ieqoires to be noticed is that
by order dated 7.7.§C07, the sale warrant was
.Hdisshed?for_spot sale and spot sale was to be
Condusc:te.d" b;.n:,:"1o13.9.20o7 and the said date has
aireadyfldiaosed without sale taking place.
dV«ahTherefofe, considering the development that
d. 'has taken place during the pendency of this
hhshspetition, the Executing Court in any' event
4;'will have to re-issue the sale 'warrant and
proclamation and fa% the date of spot sale.
-
rt Therefore, in this regard noticing the ground raised by the petitioner insisting thetwfiekifibfi ready' for' one time settlement and» died: for "
payment of amount in eaey :inetaimntS}}_ite would be necessary to provide an opbortunity j> to the petitioner before the Eeecutindgcourt to make atleast part pafimeete in the duecution proceedings to indicate dhishhbone; fides and thereafter, eeeh for eettlement of the matter before reepondent doti or gay the amount in instaimente*hobetored_ thew" Executing Court. Hence, dthe Egéep:i§§* Court is directed to grant= one =month7e Ttime from the date of iiproductionaof the certified copy of this order ibe§oreLfthéf,Executing court to enable the petitioner herein, who is the judgment debtor d"KhNo,1 "before the Executing Court, to make 4" substantial payment towards discharge of the %d- amount payable to respondent No.1-decree " holder. If" no amount, as stated. above, is paid' by the jufgment debtor before the 'u Executing Court, it would be open for the Executing Court to thereafter, issue V$a§e_ warrant and order for spot sale _gf*[;§§olx property belonging to the judggent debtor fibtl and no further indulgence will be shoga to>tfiea,f judgment debtor if no*,9ayments are eadei thereafter also.
5. This order" would<iéfiurétfohly to the benefit of ttfief.petitionefftpereih who had questioned ..VoVrde'r:V»"'dV_ated 7.7.2007 and the judgment debtor No;3{z§hose salary is ordered to be attacfiedg"#ii§ oot take benefit of this dfift Afiitfii the above observations and Vtq_uiiirections} the petition stands disposed of "'_'%ith no order as to costs.
Sd/-» Judge {'8