Partly allowed

Vithola Residential Apartment Association v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Sept 2022MFA/3279/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against the rejection of an interim injunction application. It directed the trial court to dispose of the underlying suit within six months and continued existing interim orders restraining demolition and protecting the plaintiff.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; directions issued for disposal of suit within six months; continuation of interim injunction and protection; liberty to recall witness PW.2.

Vithola Residential Apartment Association Vs the… — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

MFA No.3279 OF 2015(CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

VITHOLA RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT ASSOCIATION SITUATED AT NO. 46/1 AND 46/2 KALENA AGRAHARA BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK BANGALORE-560076 REPRESENTED BY MR B K RAJENDRAN.

¶9

...APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. AJAY J NANDALIKE, ADV. AND SMT. TANYA ELIZEBETH JOHN, ADV.)

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560001.

¶13

2 . TAHSILDAR BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK KANDAYA BHAVAN (GROUND FLOOR) K G ROAD BANGALORE-560009.

¶14

¶15

3 . BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TASK FORCE BBMP OFFICE BUILDING N R SQUARE BANGALORE-560002 REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE.

¶16

4 . KARNATAKA LAKE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2^ND FLOOR, PARISARA BHAVAN NO. 49, CHURCH STREET BANGALORE-560001.

¶17

5 . BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARA PARK WEST BANGALORE-560020 REPRESENTED COMMISSIONER.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. SRINIVAS GOWDA, AGA. FOR R1 TO R3: SRI. H S SACHIDANAND, ADV. FOR R4 SRI. B.S.SACHIN, ADV. FOR R5)

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 104 READ WITH ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED:23.03.2015 PASSED ON I.A.NO.3 AND I.A. DATED: 07.01.2015 IN O.S.NO.26522/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE XXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT, BANGALORE, REJECTING I.A.NO.3 FILED U/O 39 RULE 1 & 2 OF CPC AND I.A. DT.07.01.15 FILED UNDER THE SAME PROVISION.

¶21

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The appellant/plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S.No.26522/2014 for declaration and injunction and in the said suit, the plaintiff had filed an application in I.A.3 under Order XXXIX and Rule 1 and 2 of CPC. The trial Court by order dated 23.03.2015 has rejected the said application. Hence, the present appeal is filed.

¶25

This Court by order dated 07.05.2015 granted an order of injunction against the respondents/defendants restraining them from demolishing the portions of the residential premises and the said order is continued till today.

¶26

Subsequent to interim order granted by this Court, the trial Court has granted certain interim protection to the plaintiff and the same is continued even till today.

¶27

¶28

Therefore, it is expedient to dispose of the appeal requesting the trial Court to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.26522/2014 within six months from the date of the receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶29

Till disposal of the suit, the interim order granted by this Court on 07.05.2015 and so also, the interim protection granted by the trial Court are continued.

¶30

The plaintiffs are at liberty to file an appropriate application for recalling of PW.2 for further examination-in-chief and if such an application is filed, the trial Court to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

HA/-

Vithola Residential Apartment Association v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vithola Residential Apartment Association v. the State of Karnataka

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

Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Vs B M T F Police

Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Vs Bmtf Police Station

Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagar Palike Vs B.M.T.F. Police

Sri Kodur Venkatesh Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Gardenview Abode Private Limited Vs the State of Karnataka

T P Indrakumar Vs the Commissioner