Disposed

Sri. Ramalinga v. Sri. L. Gurulingaiah

Karnataka HC10 Jul 2024MFA/6578/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Miscellaneous First Appeal under CPC against an order dismissing an application for temporary injunction to restrain construction was disposed of. The Court directed parties to cooperate for earlier disposal of the suit and held the temporary injunction order would not bind the final judgment based on evidence led later.

What did the court decide?

Directing parties to cooperate for earlier disposal of suit with clarification that observation in impugned order will not bind final judgment.

Sri. Ramalinga Vs Sri. L. Gurulingaiah — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:26467 MFA No. 6578 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6578 OF 2017 (CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. RAMALINGA S/O. LATE G. LINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.137, 3^RD CROSS, BAPUJINAGAR, KAVIKA LAYOUT, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 026.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. SRIVASTHAVA H K.,ADVOCATE-ABSENT)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S

¶12

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

SRI. L. GURULINGAIAH S/O. LATE G. LINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT J BLOCK, POLICE QUARTERS, BEHIND IJUR POLICE STATION, RAMANAGARA TOWN-562 159.

¶14

SMT. SHIVALINGAMMA S/O. LATE HUCHAIAH, AGED MAJOR, RESIDING AT NO.11, 2^ND MAIN ROAD, KASTURIBANAGAR, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 026.

¶15

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:26467 MFA No. 6578 of 2017

¶16

SRI. L. LINGARAJ S/O. LATE G. LINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, C/O. SIDDAIAH, WASABEEDI, KAMAGERE, KOLLEGALA TALUK, CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶17

SMT. NIRMALA @ KEMPAMMA W/O. SHIVALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.63/74/3265, WARD NO. 13, THOPUKHAN MOHALLA, RAMANAGARA TOWN-562 159.

¶18

SMT. PUTTALINGAMMA @ HEMAVATHI W/O. SRI. RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.35/3471, WARD NO. 20 LANE, RAMANAGARA TOWN-562 159.

¶19

SRI. L. LOKESH S/O. LATE G. LINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 292, 7^TH CROSS, DODDABASTHI MAIN ROAD, BHUVANESHWARINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 026.

¶20

SRI. L. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O. LATE G. LINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING AT D.NO.11, 1^st MAIN ROAD, 2^ND CROSS, KASTURIBANAGAR, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 026.

¶21

SRI. PRASAD S/O. LATE NANAIAH,

¶22

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:26467 MFA No. 6578 of 2017

¶23

AND LATE MAHADEVAMMA, MAJOR, RESIDING AT NO.6, KASTURIBANAGAR, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 026.

¶24

SRI. HARISH S/O. LATE NANAIAH, AND LATE MAHADEVAMMA, AGED MAJOR, RESIDING AT NO.6, KASTURIBANAGAR, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 026.

¶25

SMT. ASHWINI D/O. LATE BASAVARAJU AND SOWBHAGYAMMA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.53, 4^TH CROSS, VALLABANAGAR, NEAR BHARATH PETROL BUNK, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560 061.

¶26

SRI. MANJUNATH

¶27

D/O. LATE BASAVARAJU AND SOWBHAGYAMMA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.53, 4^TH CROSS, VALLABANAGAR, NEAR BHARATH PETROL BUNK, UTTARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560 061.

¶28

SMT. IRSHAD UNNISSA W/O. MOHAMMAD ANWAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.442/9,

¶29

14^TH CROSS, DEVARAJ URS NAGAR,

¶30

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:26467 MFA No. 6578 of 2017

¶31

BENGALURU-560 026.

¶32

…RESPONDENTS

¶33

(BY SRI. K P CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY.,ADVOCATE FOR C/R12)

¶34

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 43 RULE 1(R) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18.08.2017, PASSED ON I.A.NO.1/2016 IN OS.NO.7969/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE XXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE I.A.NO.1 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC.

¶35

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

¶36

JUDGMENT

¶37

This appeal is filed on 19.08.2017, challenging order

¶38

dated 18.08.2017 passed by XXV Additional City Civil Judge & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in O.S.No.7696/2016 on I.A.No.1/2016.

¶39

None appears for appellant.

¶40

Since then there is no progress in appeal.

¶41

Perusal of status of suit before Trial Court would indicate

¶42

that matter was posted for arguments on 25.06.2024 and subsequently on an application filed by plaintiff matter is listed for further cross-examination of DW.1.

¶43

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:26467 MFA No. 6578 of 2017

¶44

Learned counsel for respondents who is present

¶45

would submit that appeal is against an order rejecting application for temporary injunction restraining defendant no.12 from putting up any further construction. It was submitted that defendant no.12 had in meanwhile completed construction and was residing therein.

¶46

In view of above, I do not find it required to

¶47

test legality of order impugned in this appeal.

¶48

It would be appropriate to direct parties to cooperate for earlier disposal of suit with clarification that observation/finding of Trial Court in impugned order would not bind it at time of passing judgment which would be based on evidence led by parties.

¶49

Appeal stands disposed of, accordingly.

¶50

Sd/JUDGE

¶51

RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Sri. Ramalinga v. Sri. L. Gurulingaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Ramalinga v. Sri. L. Gurulingaiah

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

Sri. Chinnappa Vs Sri Krishnappa

Sri Fani Kiran @ Kiran Shasthri, Vs Smt. Suprabha B.C.

Smt. Jyothi.K.B Vs Sri. Sathisha

The Commissioner Vs Smt Shantamma

K M Manchegowda Vs Sri Manchaiah

Sri Narayanan Ananthan Vs Sri Harish