Disposed

M/S Sreee Charan Souhardha v. Sri Shankarlal M Dugar

Karnataka HC4 Dec 2020RFA/966/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge disposed of an appeal filed by a bank challenging a permanent and mandatory injunction decree in a property dispute. The court accepted the appellant's submission to the effect that the appeal on permanent injunction is infructuous due to no construction threat, and mandated appeal disposal regarding the mandatory injunction.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of in view of the appellant's submission that the permanent injunction is infructuous and the mandatory injunction is time-barred.

M/S Sreee Charan Souhardha Vs Sri Shankarlal M Dugar — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

1 RFA.No.966/2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 04^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2020

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE K S MUDAGAL

¶6

R.F.A.NO.966/2015

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/s. Sree Charan Souhardha Cooperative Bank Ltd., A Co operative Bank, registered Under the Karnataka Souhardha Sahakari Act, No.87, H.B.Samaja Road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore 560 004, Represented by its Deputy Manager/Authorized Signatory, Sri.M.V.Venkatesh.

¶9

... APPELLANT

¶10

(BY Sri.Gangadhara Aithal S, Advocate)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Sri Shankarlal M.Dugar, s/o late Meghraj, Aged about 72 years, No.87, H.B.Samaja Road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore 560 004.

¶13

Sri.Suresh Kumar, Sri Shankarlal M.Dugar, Aged about 49 years, No.87, H.B.Samaja Road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore 560 004.

RFA.No.966/2015

Sri. Nirmal Kumar,

¶18

Sri.Shankarlal M.Dugar, Aged about 37 years, No.87, H.B.Samaja Road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore 560 004.

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

This RFA is filed under Section 96 of CPC against the judgment and decree dated 18.3.2015 passed in OS.No.3640/2007 on the file of the VII Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, (CCH-19) decreeing the suit for perpetual and mandatory injunction.

¶21

This RFA coming on for Admission through video conference/physical hearing this day, the Court delivered the following:

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

Heard.

¶24

The defendant has preferred this appeal

¶25

Challenging the judgment and decree passed by VII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH19) in OS.No.3640/2007.

¶26

By the impugned judgment and decree, the trial court has decreed the suit of the respondents/plaintiffs for permanent injunction against the appellant from putting up construction on western

¶27

side of plaint schedule ‘B’ property, putting up any

RFA.No.966/2015

permanent construction obstructing air and light of the plaintiffs property on the eastern side i.e, plaint schedule ‘A” property and for mandatory injunction that the appellant shall demolish the structure on two feet set back area towards western side of plaint schedule ‘B’ property.

¶32

Sri.Gangadhar Aithal, learned counsel for appellant submits that the appellant is not going to put up any construction on western side of plaint schedule ‘B’ property and affect the air and light in respect of plaint schedule ‘A’ property and adheres to the decree of permanent injunction. Therefore, he submits that appeal in that regard may be dismissed.

¶33

So far as the decree of mandatory injunction,

¶34

he submits that the decree was drawn on 1.4.2015 and since then five years have elapsed. He submits that since plaintiffs have not filed any execution petition for enforcement of the said decree within three years, now they are barred from executing the said decree in view of

RFA.No.966/2015

the limitation prescribed under Article 135 of the Limitation Act and thus, his appeal has become infructuous in that regard. He submits that accordingly, this appeal may be disposed of.

¶39

Recording the submission of the learned

¶40

counsel for appellant, the appeal is disposed of

accordingly.

Sd/JUDGE

M/S Sreee Charan Souhardha v. Sri Shankarlal M Dugar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Sreee Charan Souhardha v. Sri Shankarlal M Dugar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B R Sudheer Kumar Vs Smt Pallavi

Ashoka Vs Yogachari K v

Doddaiah @ Mariswamy Vs the State of Karnataka

N N Chikkanna @ Kumar Vs Sri B Krishnappa

Purushotham @ Billal Vs State by

Surajdev Trading Company Vs Agricultural Produce Market Committee