The appellate court allowed the miscellaneous first appeal to modify the trial court's restraint order. It set aside the order restraining the removal of crops while allowing the restraint on removing established trees.
Restraint order regarding removal of crop was set aside; restraint on removing trees remained effective.
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 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3957 OF 2020 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577412
Digitally signed by SHARANYA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KENCHENAHALLI, YELAHANKA BANGALORE-560064
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. JAYAPRAKASH R.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577417
SAGAR TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577417
…RESPONDENTS
(VIDE ORDER DATED 22.07.2021, SRI B.R.DEEPAK, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02.06.2020 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN O.S.NO.48/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAGAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned
counsel for the respondents.
and coconut trees are cultivated in item No.2 of the suit schedule properties and the order passed is restraining the
plaintiffs from removing areca nut and coconut trees and not the crops. It is also submitted that suit is filed for the relief of declaration and partition and with regard to removal of crop is concerned, the restraint order requires no interference. Hence, for the limited purpose, this miscellaneous first appeal requires to be allowed. The judgment of the Trial Court is modified, insofar as the crop is concerned, since both the counsel for the parties submit that almost evidence is completed and matter is at the fag end of consideration of the main appeal on merits. Hence, the restraint order passed with regard to removal of crop and cultivation is set aside.
Accordingly, this miscellaneous first appeal stands
disposed of.
Sd/JUDGE
ST
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the restraint order restricting removal of crops on suit property requires modification.
Whether the appeal succeeds to the extent of modifying the restraint order on crops while maintaining it on trees.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
JAHNAVI W/O LATE N.S.MAHABALAGIRI RAO
DEEPAK KUMAR N.M.
MADHAVI SUJENDRA W/O SUJENDRA
PRADEEP KUMAR M.N.
SMT. B. SHOBHA W/O BALOASUBRAMANYA
SMT. T.S. SHUBHA W/O T.G. SURESH
H.P. SANDESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
