HANAMAPPA Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel Sri Malimath for the petitioners, Sri Shevgoor for respondent-2 and Sri M. Prabhudev, H.C.G.P. for respondent-1 have submitted that the matters may be heard finally on merits and disposed of. Accordingly, arguments are heard and the revisions are disposed of.

(2.) The decree-holders in Execution Case Nos. 97, 101,91,95,103,93,92, 98,94,99,100 and 102 of 1980 have preferred these revisions against the orders dated 27-11-1986, dismissing the execution petitions.

(3.) The decree-holders have sued out executions to recover money awarded by the Civil Judge on references made to it by the Land Acquisition Officer. Res- pcndent-2 City Municipal council, "Bagalkot, made an application in all the cases under Order 1 rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 151 CPC, to implead it in the execution contending that the area in question had been acquired for its benefit i.e., for the purpose of forming a layout for the purpose of house sites and the Civil Judge had not issued any notice to it at all, and therefore the award was ineffective as against it and it cannot be executed against it.