Petitioners challenged orders dismissing their application for temporary injunction and interim relief in a property dispute suit. The single-judge bench declined to interfere with the impugned orders but allowed merits to be urged later.
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 08TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO.4950/2022 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN :
SRI.MALLIKARJUNA S/O LATE KARIMADAPPA AND SANNAMMA
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS,
2
ALL ARE R/AT GEJJAGALLI VILLAGE, MANDAKALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, MYSURU TQ AND DISTRICT-570 001.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHIVANANDA D S, ADVOCATE)
AND :
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. J.M. ANILKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.03.2020 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MYSURU AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18.12.2021 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MYSURU DISMISSING THE IA NO.1/2020 IN OS NO. 34/2020 IN MA NO.23/2020 AS PER ANNX-E AND G RESPECTIVELY BY ISSUE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, ANY OTHER WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THE CASE MAY BE.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
O R D E R
The petitioners are the plaintiffs in
O.S.No.34/2020 on the file of the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mysuru (for short, ' the civil Court '). The petitioners have impugned the civil Court's order dated 10.03.2020 and the order dated 18.12.2021 in M.A.No.23/2020 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mysuru (for short, ' the appellate Court '). The civil Court by its impugned order has rejected the petitioners' application for temporary injunction against the respondents, and the appellate Court by its impugned order has confirmed the civil Court's order.
The learned counsels for the parties do not dispute that the respondents have purchased an extent of 1 acre 39 guntas out of the total extent of about 4 acres 16 guntas in Sy.No.6/1 of Koppalauru Village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysuru Taluk and the controversy in the
4
present suit is because the petitioners assert that the respondents have encroached a certain portion of the remaining extent. The learned counsels also do not dispute that after the purchase, the respondents have got the land diverted from agricultural to nonagricultural purpose with necessary sanctions and approvals for development of a residential layout and such development is also complete.
If these submissions remain un-controverted, this Court is not persuaded to opine that there is any irregularity with the impugned order and therefore, there is reason for interference. However, the petition must be disposed of with the observation that the petitioners, notwithstanding the impugned order, shall be at liberty to urge all grounds for effectively prosecuting their case.
Sd/JUDGE
RB
1 issue framed by the court
Whether any irregularity exists in the impugned orders dismissing the application for temporary injunction and the application seeking interim orders in the pending civil suit regarding land encroachm
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri Mallappa S/O Late Karimadappa and Sannamma
Sri. Mahadevappa S/O Late Karimadappa and Sannamma
Sri. Mallikarjuna S/O Late Karimadappa and Sannamma
Smt. Puttaningamma W/O Late Mallikarjuna
Kumari Maheshwari D/O Late Mallikarjuna
Kumari Manasa D/O Late Mallikarjuna
B. M. Shyam Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
