HANUMAPPA S A Vs. NEELAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. On 30.06.2014, the following order was passed: -

(2.) AT the outset, I would like to place on record, a word of appreciation, even before I write the order, for the service rendered by Mr.Ajith Anand Shetty, learned advocate appointed as Amicus Curiae by this Court to represent the petitioner. In find that he has taken trouble in studying the case and placing it before the Court efficiently.

(3.) THESE writ petitions arises from the orders dated 07.12.2013, 25.09.2013 and 05.10.2013, whereby, three interim applications have been rejected. The 1st application was filed by the petitioner under Section 47 of CPC seeking enquiry as to identity of the property, which is a subject matter of the instant proceedings. Order passed on this application is under challenge in W.P.No.10912/2014. The 2nd application was filed by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 29 of CPC, seeking stay of the execution proceedings (i.e., Execution Case No.1341/2013) till disposal of O.S.No.1142/2002 filed by the petitioner for perpetual injunction. Order passed on this application, is a subject matter of W.P.No.56571/2013. The 3rd application filed by the petitioner was also under Section 47 of CPC questioning maintainability of the Execution case.