TECHNOCON BUILDERS Vs. K. SUDARSHANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The decree holder of Execution Petition bearing No.971/2013 which was pending on the file of the Court of the XXXI Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City (CCH-14) has filed these petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the common order passed on I.A.Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5. The impugned order is dated 12.11.2013 under which the very execution petition filed by the decree holder is dismissed. Learned Judge has dismissed the execution petition essentially on the ground that the compromise decree obtained by the decree holder in O.S.No.4093/2009 on 23.01.2012 is inexecutable.

(2.) The parties will be referred to as plaintiff and defendants as per their ranking given in the original suit filed before the trial Court in O.S.No.4093/2009.

(3.) An application had been filed under Order XXI Rule 54 read with Section 151 of CPC vide I.A.No.1 and another interlocutary application was filed under Order XXI Rule 64 read with Section 151 of CPC vide I.A.No.2. These two applications filed by the decree holder have been dismissed. The application filed by Smt.Srilatha Prakash 4th respondent herein under Order XXI Rule 58 of CPC is allowed and an ex parte order of attachment of the schedule property passed on 12.4.2013 is recalled. The application filed under Order XXI Rule 26 of CPC by Smt.Srilath Prakash for staying operation of the compromise decree obtained in O.S.No.4093/2009 is dismissed. The execution petition filed under Order XXI Rule 11 of CPC in terms of the compromise decree dated 23.01.2012 is held to be inexecutable. It is these orders which are called in question on various grounds as set out in the memorandum of writ petitions.