Appeal against rejection of temporary injunction restraining construction over suit schedule property in a partition suit. The High Court held the trial court erred in inquiring into the nature of the property at an interim stage despite an existing status-quo direction, allowed the appeal and directed status-quo till disposal of the suit.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:26134 MFA No. 2938 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2938 OF 2024 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI CHINNAPPA, S/O LATE KADIRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, KEMPATHIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
…APPELLANT
[BY SRI SUNIL S. RAO, ADVOCATE FOR SRI T. SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE (PH)]
AND:
ALSO AT: SONNAMARANAHALLI VILLAGE, Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI HEGGADIHALLI POST, TUBUGERE HOBLI PARLATTAYA S DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, Location: High BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 561 205. Court of Karnataka
ALSO AT: SONNAMARANAHALLI VILLAGE, HEGGADIHALLI POST, TUBUGERE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 561 205.
NC: 2024:KHC:26134 MFA No. 2938 of 2024
ALSO AT: SONNAMARANAHALLI VILLAGE, HEGGADIHALLI POST, TUBUGERE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 561 205.
…RESPONDENTS
[BY SRI VARUN GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3 (PH); NOTICE SERVED TO R4 & R5]
THIS MFA IS FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.04.2024 PASSED ON I.A.NO.11 IN O.S.NO.300/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DODDABALLAPURA, REJECTING I.A.NO.11 FILED U/O.39 RULE 1 AND 2 R/W SEC.151 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Challenging order dated 27.04.2024 passed by Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Doddaballapura, in O.S.no.300/2018 on I.A.no.11 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ( 'CPC' for short), this appeal is filed.
NC: 2024:KHC:26134 MFA No. 2938 of 2024
required to be maintained till disposal of suit. It was also submitted nature of suit schedule properties had to be adjudicated after trial and indulgence into same by trial Court at interim stage was unjustified and sought for allowing appeal.
order.
"Whether impugned order is untenable and calls for interference?"
NC: 2024:KHC:26134 MFA No. 2938 of 2024
MFA.no.5122/2022 reveals that this Court while considering plaintiff's appeal against order on I.As.no.3 and 4 had recorded submission of counsel about co-operating for early disposal of suit and seeking for modification of interim injunction by directing parties to maintain status-quo. It is seen submission was not opposed by learned counsel for respondents and appeal was disposed of directing parties to maintain status-quo regarding suit schedule properties. A direction was also issued to trial Court to expedite disposal of suit. While learned counsel for respondents would be justified in submitting that there has been some delay in conclusion of suit and same was affecting interest of defendants, same would however not justify any of parties seeking to transgress order directing them to maintain status-quo till conclusion of suit.
NC: 2024:KHC:26134 MFA No. 2938 of 2024
short ground, order impugned would be untenable. Point for consideration is answered in affirmative.
Consequently, appeal is allowed, impugned order dated 27.04.2024 passed by Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Doddaballapura, in O.S.no.300/2018 on I.A.no.11 filed by plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC is disposed of in terms of order passed by this Court in MFA.no.5122/2022, wherein both parties were directed to maintain status-quo regarding suit schedule properties existing as on 14.12.2022 till disposal of suit.
In fitment of facts and circumstances, it would be appropriate to issue further direction to trial Court to expedite early disposal of suit within an outer limit of eight months, by setting specific timeline for each stage of suit.
Needles to state that direction issued to parties to co-operate for early disposal would continue.
Sd/JUDGE
GRD
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court's rejection of temporary injunction was untenable despite a prior status-quo order in MFA No.5122/2022?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri Chinnappa
Sri Krishnappa
Smt. Rathnamma
Sri Nagaraj K.
Smt. Akkayyamma
Smt. Obamma
Ravi V Hosmani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
