Defendants appealed against temporary injunction restraining them from alienating suit property during a title dispute with the plaintiff. The High Court upheld the injunction as justified to prevent third-party rights and multiplicity of proceedings, and refused an out-of-turn speedy disposal direction.
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 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4355 OF 2024 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
D/O VENKATASWAMY AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
APPELLANTS NO.1 TO 14 ARE RESIDENTS OF SARJAPURA VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.
REPRESENTED BY THEIR GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI MOHAN.G. S/O GUNDAPPA, VIDE REGISTERED GENRAL POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 11-08-2022
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. MURALIDHAR R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI. MUNIRAJAPPA. S.C. S/O CHINNAPPA AND HIS FIRST WIFE JAYAMMA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT AMBEDIKAR COLONY, SARJAPURA TOWN HOBLI, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.
…RESPONDENT
THIS MFA FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED: 16.04.2024 PASSED ON IA NO.1 IN O.S.NO.16/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANEKAL, ALLOWING IA NO.1 FILED U/O.39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.I in O.S.No.16/2023 dated 16.04.2024 by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Anekal, the appellants/defendants are before this Court.
NC: 2024:KHC:32529 MFA No. 4355 of 2024
or creating any kind of charge over the suit schedule property pending disposal of the suit.
temporary injunction and the balance of convenience is in favour of the plaintiff and accordingly, granted temporary injunction restraining the defendants from alienating or creating any kind of charge over the suit scheduled property till disposal of the suit.
NC: 2024:KHC:32529 MFA No. 4355 of 2024
unless and until the order of injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the property is granted, it would unnecessarily create the third party rights and also gives rise to multiplicity of proceedings. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that the trial court had rightly considered the case of the parties and rightly granted injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the property. Coming to the request of the learned counsel for a speedy disposal, this is the suit of the year 2023 and as there are other pending suits, there cannot be a direction to the trial Court to hear this matter out of turn. On that ground, the request for early disposal cannot be considered.
ORDER
SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE
MEG
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19
1 issue framed by the court
Should the defendants in a declaration suit be restrained from alienating the suit property pending disposal of the trial?
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Bharathi W/o Late Jayaram and 13 others (appellants, represented by GPA holder Sri Mohan G.)
Sri Mohan G.
Sri Munirajappa S.C.
Lalitha Kanneganti
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
