Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, The Defense Estate Officer, Karnataka and Goa Circle, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the order dated 02.09.2022 passed in Execution Case No.35/2020 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Karwar. The respondents were private individuals and the Special Land Acquisition Officer. The petitioner contended that the execution court had proceeded ex-parte without issuing any notice to the petitioner, who was the judgment debtor in the execution proceedings. The High Court observed that the execution court had not issued notice to the petitioner before passing the impugned order, which was in violation of the principles of natural justice and the mandatory requirement under Order XXI Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The court noted that the petitioner was not given an opportunity to be heard. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order, and remanded the matter back to the execution court for fresh consideration after issuing notice to the petitioner and affording an opportunity of hearing. The court directed the execution court to dispose of the execution case within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Execution Proceedings - Notice to Judgment Debtor - Order XXI Rule 22 CPC - The execution court passed an order without issuing notice to the judgment debtor, which is mandatory under Order XXI Rule 22 CPC. The High Court quashed the order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration after issuing notice to the petitioner. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order dated 02.09.2022 passed in Execution Case No.35/2020 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Karwar, is liable to be quashed on the ground that no notice was issued to the petitioner/judgment debtor before proceeding with execution.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The order dated 02.09.2022 passed in Execution Case No.35/2020 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Karwar, is quashed. The matter is remanded back to the execution court for fresh consideration after issuing notice to the petitioner and affording an opportunity of hearing. The execution court is directed to dispose of the execution case within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- Notice to judgment debtor
- Order XXI Rule 22 CPC
- Execution proceedings
- Ex-parte order
- Certiorari
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (08) 37
WP No. 102884 of 2025 (GM-CPC)
Sri. Mrutyunjaya S. Hallikeri (for petitioner), Sri. Ramesh B. Chigari (AGA for respondent No.9)
The Defense Estate Officer, Karnataka and Goa Circle
Sri. Ira Omna Naik (since deceased by her LRs) and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order passed in execution proceedings.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 02.09.2022 passed in Execution Case No.35/2020 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Karwar.
Filing Reason
The petitioner alleged that the execution court passed the impugned order without issuing notice to the petitioner, who was the judgment debtor, thereby violating principles of natural justice.
Previous Decisions
The execution court had passed the order dated 02.09.2022 in Execution Case No.35/2020, which was challenged in this writ petition.
Issues
Whether the impugned order passed by the execution court without issuing notice to the judgment debtor is sustainable in law?
Whether the principles of natural justice were violated in the execution proceedings?
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that no notice was issued to them before the execution court passed the impugned order, and they were not given an opportunity to be heard.
The respondents did not file any counter affidavit, and the AGA accepted notice for respondent No.9.
Ratio Decidendi
An execution court must issue notice to the judgment debtor before proceeding with execution, as mandated by Order XXI Rule 22 CPC. Failure to do so violates principles of natural justice and renders the order liable to be quashed.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner-The Defense Estate Officer, Karnataka and Goa Circle is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Issue a writ, order or Direction in the nature of certiorari by quashing the order dated 02.09.2022 passed in Execution Case No.35/2020 by the Hon’ble Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Karwar vide Annexure-E.
The execution court has not issued any notice to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be quashed.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Execution Case No.35/2020 before the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Karwar. The execution court passed an order on 02.09.2022. The petitioner challenged that order by filing the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The High Court heard the matter on 20.08.2025 and allowed the petition, quashing the impugned order and remanding the case.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order XXI Rule 22
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
