lbrahim Khan v. 1. The State of relangana

Counsel for t:he Petitioner: SRI KUNAL KAKKAL, REPRESENTING SRI B MOHAN counsel for lhe Respondent Nos.1 to 4: sRl D. PRADEEP AGp FoR HOME Counsel for lhe Respondent No.S: --- The Court made the following: ORDER i' i i i l t: i: I I I l ; I I : ' f^- THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI(ARAIVIJI ORDER: WRIT PETITION No.4689 of 2()18 This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relieft "...to issue Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in ttre nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of tl.e Respondent No.2 to 4 in not providing the assistance to enforce the Civil Court decree passed in O.S.No.44/2OO2 dt.29-6-2oog on the frle of Junior Civil Judge, Parigi, Ranga Reddy District in respect of property admeasuring Ac.2-2Ogts, in Sy.No.1 L2lAl L, to an extent of Ac.1-00gts., in Sy.No.L12/AAll, totaling to Ac.4-O5gts., situated at Chigural Palli Gram Panchayat, Lakhnapur Village, Parigi Mandal, Vikarabad District is illegal, arbitrar5r and unconstitutional and pass..."

2. Heard Mr. Kunal Kakkal, learned counsel representing Mr. B.Mohan, learned counsel for the .petitioner and Mr. D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondent Nos.l to 4.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that respondent Nos. 2 to 4 have failed to provide necessary assistance to enforce the civil court decree passed in O.S. No. 44 of 2OO2 by the learned Junior Civil Jud.ge, Parigt, Ranga Reddy District, in respect of the petitioner's schedule property. Hence, the present writ petition has been liled seeking appropriate directions. .lr

4. The l,=arned Assistant Government Pleader submits that, in the absen<:e of any specific direction from the competent civil court, the respondent-Police authorities cannot extend assistance for enforcement of a civil decree. It is the settled position of law that execution of a judgment and decree mtrst be sought by filing an appropriate petition before the civil court concerned. Therefore, the petitioner's contention against the respondent--Police authorities for not providing assistance is unfounded. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

5. I hav': perused the material available on record.

6. The petitioner's grievance is that the respondent-Police authorities are not providing assistance or protection for enforcement of the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 44 of 2OO2 by the learned Junior Civil Judge, Parigi. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner has not filed any execution petition for enforcement of the decree before the competent civil court. The issue as to whether a party can invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for enforcemerrt of a civil court decree, without approaching the

9.{ecuting c:ourt, is no longer res integra. 4 -

7. A Division Bench of this Court, in Kabbakula Padma u. State of Telangana l(2O231 1 ALT 7651, and also in Mudraboina adLrclu & oth.ers u. state of Telangana & ot?rcrs [MANU/T Llo3sg 120231, has categorically held that when a d.ecree is granted by a civil court, the proper remedy for its implementation is to approach the executing court by filing an execution petition. Seeking enforcement of such a decree directly under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, without availing the statutory remedy under the Code of Civil Procedure, is not maintainable. In view of the settled legal position, this court is of the B. consid.ered. opinion that the present writ petition is not maintainable. However, the rights of the petitioner are reserved to avail appropriate remedies before the executing court, if the cause of action still survives. g. With the above said direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed' SD/- AHMED ULLA SISTANT ,/TRUE COPY// To, 1 The Principal Secretary, Prl.Secy., Home dept' Telangana Home Department' Secretariat, Hyd SECTION OFFICER of T.S., The State of

2. The Superintendent of Police, Vikarabad District at Vikarabad , ,: .1].

3. The lnspector of Police, Parigi, Vikarabad District. 4. The Sut, lnspector of Police, Parigi; Vikarabad District. 5 One CC to Sri B. Mohan, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderab,ad [OUI

7. Two CD Copies TJ GJP /,11- I I I I I I I HIGH COURT DATED:2t911012025 : ':.i:: . ,+i-,r;;i;i ORDER :t r:+:. i ill: :i-'.:... qf ' "'1; -i' i' WP.No.4689 of 2A18', 'i,: . , zt( sE{ ..}- i S o(J 16 rf: * DISPOSINIG OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COST t: ii:lri ':'.i :.. - ji,.,t:i-