Disposed

Smt Gowramma v. Sri Gavigowda

Karnataka HC23 Jul 2021WP/9680/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the stay of a discharge of temporary injunction in O.S. 236/2010. The High Court directed the Trial Judge to complete the hearing and dispose of the suit within 45 days.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the learned Trial Judge to dispose of O.S.No.236/2010 by completing hearing within 45 days.

Smt Gowramma Vs Sri Gavigowda — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JULY, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.9680 OF 2021 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

SMT. GOWRAMMA S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

¶9

SRI. B.R. ANIL KUMAR S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS

¶10

B.R. SUNIL KUMAR S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

¶11

ALL ARE R/O CHUNCHEGOWDADANA DODDI, BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SMT. POONAM PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR SHRI. G.M. GADILINGAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND :

¶15

SRI. GAVIGOWDA S/O LATE MADAKEHULI LINGAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003

¶16

SRI. B.L. NAGARAJU S/O LATE PATEL LINGAIAH AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

¶17

R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI

¶18

¶19

	VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003
3.	SMT. G.S. VISHALAKSHI W/O LATE JAYANNA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003
4.	KUM. BHOOMIKA D/O LATE JAYANNA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003
5.	SRI. NAGALINGAIAH S/O LINGAIAH
	AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT KONASALE VILLAGE KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003
6.	SMT. GOWRAMMA
	W/O LATE CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 70 YEAR R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003
7.	SRI. RAJU
	S/O LATE CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003
8.	SRI. CHUNCHEGOWDA
	S/O LATE CHUNCHEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
	R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI
	VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST

¶20

¶21

KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003

¶22

SRI. B.S. KRISHNA S/O LATE CHIKKASHAMBUGODA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003

¶23

SRI. B.S. SHIVANNA S/O LATE CHIKKASHAMBUGOWDA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003

¶24

THE SECRETARY BESAGARAHALLI GRAMAPANCHAYATH BESAGARAHALLI VILLAGE, KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003

¶25

SMT. J. SAMYUKTHA W/O SHANKAR AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NEAR MARUTHI TEMPLE MARUTHI NAGARA NAGARABHAVI, BENGALURU-560 072

¶26

SMT. J. GUNASHREE W/O HARSHA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NEAR MARUTHI TEMPLE MARUTHI NAGARA NAGARABHAVI, BENGALURU-560 072

¶27

SRI. C. KRISHNA S/O LATE CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003

¶28

¶29

PARVATHI D/O LATE CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003

¶30

SMT. YASHODHA W/O RAJU AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003

¶31

17. VISHALAKSHI

¶32

D/O CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT CHUNCHEGOWDADANADODDI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF BESAGARAHALLI POST KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577 003 ...RESPONDENTS

¶33

(BY SHRI. K.N. NITISH, ADVOCATE FOR SHRI. K.V. NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DTD.23.07.2021-NOTICE TO R2 TO R17 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶34

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17.05.2021, VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED IN M.A.NO.1/2021, PASSED BY THE HONBLE VACATION JUDGE AT MANDYA AND ETC.,

¶35

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶36

¶37

ORDER

¶38

Petitioners are defendants No.1 to 3 in O.S.No.236/2010 on the file of I Additional Civil Judge, Maddur.

¶39

Plaintiffs in the suit are general public. The prayer in the suit is for declaration that the suit property is a road wherein plaintiffs and other villagers claim to have right to thoroughfare. During the pendency of the suit, petitioners have demolished their house and sought to reconstruct the same. They filed an application to dissolve the temporary injunction granted in favour of the plaintiffs. The Trial Court has discharged the injunction by order. Petitioners have started construction work.

¶40

Learned Advocate for petitioners has filed memo along with photographs to show that construction of walls is complete. Plaintiffs have challenged the order passed by the Trial Court discharging the injunction in M.A.No.1/2021. By impugned order, First Appellate Court has stayed the order passed by the Trial Court. Hence, this writ petition.

¶41

Plaintiffs' case is, petitioners had constructed their house on the public road. The present status is, petitioners have

¶42

¶43

demolished old house and put up new construction. Learned advocates on both sides agree that the suit is at the stage of addressing final arguments.

¶44

I have carefully considered submissions of learned advocates on both sides and perused the records.

¶45

In the facts and circumstance, it would be just and appropriate to direct the learned Trial Judge to complete hearing and dispose of the suit so that the parties will know their position. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Trial Judge to dispose of O.S.No.236/2010 by completing hearing within an outer limit of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Both plaintiffs and defendants shall co-operate and not seek adjournment.

¶46

No costs.

¶47

Sd/JUDGE

¶48

Smt Gowramma v. Sri Gavigowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Gowramma v. Sri Gavigowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Mahadevamma Vs Smt Rajamani @ Rajamma

Sri Lokesh Vs Krishnappa

Sri. Hanumaiah @ Hanumanthappa Vs M/S Harina Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Smt.P.Yashoda Vs Smt.S.Suchitra

Sri. Lingaraju. N Vs Mr. P. Deepak Kumar

Sri. S.G. Ramesh Kumar Vs Sri. Annappa