A miscellaneous first appeal against an order granting a perpetual injunction restraining alienation of property was disposed of in the interest of justice, given ongoing settlement negotiations and the commencement of the trial on merits.
The appeal and the interlocutory application were dismissed/sought without obtaining the benefit of the order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2841/2016 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
VINAYAKANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 050.
... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. B. R. VISWANATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI. G.R. GIRISH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS SON OF G N RAJASHEKAR RESIDING AT NO.4 1ST FLOOR, 2ND MAIN ROAD CHAMRAJPET, BANGALORE - 560 018.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHANMUKHAPPA, ADVOCATE)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 10.02.2016 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN O.S.NO.8269/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XXVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE, (CCH-9) ALLOWING I.A.NO.1 FILED U/O 39 RULE 1 & 2 OF CPC.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The defendants in O.S.No.8269/2015 on the file of
the XXVII Additional City Civil Judge, Bengalore (for short, 'the civil Court ') have impugned the order dated
- 3 -
10.02.2016. The civil Court by this order has allowed the respondent's application under order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 restraining the appellant from alienating or creating charge over the respondent's asserted one third share in the schedule 'B' property.
Sri B.R. Viswanath, the learned counsel for the
appellant, submits that the parties are in the midst of negotiations for an amicable settlement and trial is also commenced. Therefore, the appeal could be disposed of observing that if there has to be adjudication on merits failing settlement talks, the same should be independent of any observation in the impugned order.
This submissions must be accepted and therefore, the appeal is disposed of accordingly.
In view of the disposal of the appeal, IA No.1/2016
does not survive for consideration and the same is disposed of accordingly.
SD/JUDGE
SA Ct:sr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal filed against the interlocutory order restraining alienation of property should be finally disposed of on the ground of pending settlement negotiations.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
G.N. Rajashekar
G.R. Dinesh
S. Shashi Rajashekar
Diganth and Shruthi Dinesh
G.R. Girish
B.M. Shyam Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
