Disposed

Smt. S. Santhana Lakshmi v. Sri. Chandrasekhar D

Karnataka HC15 Mar 2024MFA/354/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against a temporary injunction in a rival-claim property dispute. Both parties held injunctions in cross-suits over the same BDA site. The High Court directed both parties to maintain status quo, refrain from further construction, transferred the bare-injunction suit to the court hearing the declaration suit, and directed disposal within one year.

What did the court decide?

Status quo maintained; no further construction; O.S.No.1406/2022 withdrawn from CCH-64 and transferred to CCH-41 for joint disposal within one year.

Smt. S. Santhana Lakshmi Vs Sri. Chandrasekhar D — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:10783 MFA No. 354 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 354 OF 2024 (CPC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. S. SANTHANA LAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, W/O S. BALASUBRAMANIAM, R/AT NO 437/1, 11^TH CROSS, 3^RD BLOCK, VIDYARANYAPURA, BENGALURU-560097

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SMT.SUSHILA S., SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. SOMANATHA H., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHARANYA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

SRI. CHANDRASEKHAR D., AGED 43 YEARS, S/O R DODDAIAH, R/AT NO.12, 8^TH CROSS, ’A’ BLOCK, NEAR BROOK FIELD, AECS LAYOUT, KUNDANAHALLI, BENGALURU-560037

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. KALYAN R., ADVOCATE)

¶17

THIS MFA IS FILED U/O 43 RULE 1(r) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 09.11.2023 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 AND 2 IN O.S.NO.1406/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE LXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CCH-64, ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.1 THE FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC AND REJECTING THE I.A.NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 4 OF CPC.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:10783 MFA No. 354 of 2024

¶20

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

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶23

This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed challenging the order passed by the trial in O.S.No.1406/2022 allowing the application filed by the respondent herein filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC granting the temporary injunction restraining the appellant from interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintiff.

¶24

The case of the respondent/plaintiff before the Trial Court that suit schedule property belongs to the plaintiff and the same is registered under the sale deed dated 23.08.2021 and in support of the same, encumbrance certificate, khata certificate, khata extract, tax paid receipts are produced and the respondent has produced registered sale deed of vendor dated 12.07.2016

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:10783 MFA No. 354 of 2024

¶26

and also the khata certificate, khata extract, BDA endorsement and again khata certificate, tax paid receipts, conversion order, approved sanction plan, electricity bill, building construction photographs before this Court and they have started the foundation work.

¶27

The counsel appearing for the respondent also would contend that they are claiming the site No.1179 and the same is allotted by the BDA. The counsel also would contend that on the southern side, the other site of BDA bearing site No.1178 also is in existence and there is no dispute with regard to identity of the property and also counsel produced documents with regard to the very location of the property along with registered sale deed dated 29.08.2000 and also endorsement dated 26.08.2000, khata certificate, khata extract, tax paid receipts, encumbrance certificate from 2017 to 2021, possession certificate dated 03.08.1989, khata certificate dated 25.10.1989, allotment letter dated 30.12.1989 and also the letter of order dated 25.01.1988 and the NCR issued by the Hennur Police Station and sale deed dated

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:10783 MFA No. 354 of 2024

¶29

19.12.2000 of adjacent site No.1178 and counsel referring this sale deed also refers that on the northern boundary the property is shown as the appellant’s property as site No.1179 in the sale deed of the adjacent property. RTI application dated 04.01.2024, letter of information given by BDA dated 18.01.2024 and layout plan issued by the BDA in response to the RTI application, two photographs of appellant’s property taken on 22.02.2024. The counsel referring this would vehemently contend that the site is formed out of Sy.No.76 and also northern boundary it is clearly mentioned as RCC and also the layout plan also clearly discloses the topography of the written statement’s property and also produced the two photographs which shows the site No.37 and contend that the property is still vacant. But, on perusal of photographs, it also discloses that the columns are raised in the said site and also the plaintiff claims that already they started constructions, but for some reasons it was stopped.

¶30

It is also important to note that both the parties

¶31

have approached the Court by filing a suit. The appellant

¶32

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:10783 MFA No. 354 of 2024

¶33

herein has also filed the suit in O.S.No.3402/2022 seeking the relief of declaration and also temporary injunction. Admittedly, injunction has been granted in the said suit also. In the present suit also there is an order of injunction. Both of them are claiming the very same property, when such dispute is between parties with regard to the identification of the property is concerned. It is appropriate to direct the parties to maintain the Status Quo and not to put up any further construction in the said site. It is also important to note that when both the parties are claiming the right in respect of the properties based on their respective sale deeds, it is appropriate to direct the Trial Court to decide both the suits in O.S.No.3402/2022 and present suit of O.S.No.1406/2022 or otherwise it will leads to a multiplicity of proceedings, since the Trial Court has to decide the identity of the property when rival claim is made in respect of the very same property. It is appropriate to dispose of the matter with a direction to take-up both the cases in one Court and decide the same.

¶34

¶35

NC: 2024:KHC:10783 MFA No. 354 of 2024

¶36

In view of the discussions made above, I pass

¶37

the following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

i) The Miscellaneous First Appeal is disposed of

¶40

with a direction to both the parties to maintain Status Quo and not to put-up any further construction.

¶41

ii) The suit in O.S.No.3402/2022 is pending before the XL Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge Court (CCH-41) wherein the comprehensive relief of declaration and injunction is sought. The other suit in O.S.No.1406/2022 pending before LXIII Addl. City Civil and Session Judge (CCH-64) is filed only for bear injunction. Hence, it is appropriate to withdraw the O.S.No. 1406/2022 pending before the CCH-64 and transfer the same to the CCH-41 wherein O.S.No.3402/2022 is pending. In view of rival claim is made by the respective parties, it is appropriate to direct the Trial Court to dispose of the matter within one year.

¶42

¶43

NC: 2024:KHC:10783 MFA No. 354 of 2024

¶44

iii) Both the counsel for respective parties and also

¶45

the parties are directed to assist the Trial Court in disposal of the case in a stipulated time of one year from today.

¶46

Sd/JUDGE

¶47

RHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27

Smt. S. Santhana Lakshmi v. Sri. Chandrasekhar D

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. S. Santhana Lakshmi v. Sri. Chandrasekhar D

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

Vijayakumar Vs State of Karnataka

K Shivanna Vs Rani

S Balaji Vs M/S. Outback Adventures

Dr. S. Bheemappa Vs Sri. R. Annadanappa

Mr. Mohanlal Jindal Vs M/S. Rest House Developers

Dr. S. Malini Vs the State of Karnataka