Dismissed

Sri. R. Sampangi Ramaiah v. Sri. R Vasantharaju

Karnataka HC28 Nov 2024MFA/856/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellant challenged an order granting temporary injunction against alienation of property in a suit for partition. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial court correctly applied its discretion as the nature of the property required a full trial and alienation would cause multiplicity of proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Miscellaneous First Appeal dismissed

Sri. R. Sampangi Ramaiah Vs Sri. R Vasantharaju — Partition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:48905 MFA No. 856 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 856 OF 2023 (CPC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. R.SAMPANGI RAMAIAH S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.396/1 K.NARAYANAPURA, KOTHANUR POST, BANGALORE - 560077

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. NARAYANA SWAMY P.M., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SRI. R. VASANTHARAJU S/O LATE RAMAIAH Digitally signed by DEVIKA M AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS Location: HIGH R/AT NO.35, VASANTHA NILAYA COURT OF KARNATAKA 2^ND MAIN ROAD, R.R.SCHOOL ROAD MUNESHWARASWAMY LAYOUT DODDABOMMASANDRA VIDYARANYAPURA POST BANGALORE – 560097.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI. R.C.CHANDRASHEKAR, & SRI. ABHILASH P., ADVOCATES FOR C/R)

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:48905 MFA No. 856 of 2023

¶17

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.10.2022 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN O.S.NO.3038/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC.

¶18

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant’s and

¶22

also the learned counsel for the respondent. The material discloses that the suit is filed for the relief of partition wherein prayer is also sought not to alienate the same. The defendants have filed written statement contending that some of the properties are self acquired properties and some of the properties are the ancestral properties and Trial Court comes to the conclusion that even inspite of the same is contended, the same cannot be considered at the time of consideration of I.A, matter requires full pledged trial as to whether it is a ancestral property or self acquired property.

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:48905 MFA No. 856 of 2023

¶24

The counsel appearing for the respondent

¶25

brought to notice of this Court that sisters have executed the release deed in favour of brothers and only the partition has to be taken place between the brothers and release deed is also registered on 30.11.2017 and no material is placed before the Court subsequent to the release deed executed by sister or any partition executed between the brothers. When such being the case, order is passed not to alienate and the same will not cause prejudice to other side and the share of the parties also to be determined in a suit for partition and if the defendants

¶26

are permitted to alienate the property, it will cause multiplicity of proceedings and hence, the Trial Court rightly exercised the discretion in coming to the conclusion that the plaintiffs have made out prima facie case and balance of convenience. Hence, I do not find any ground to reverse the finding of the Trial Court and no grounds in the appeal.

¶27

NC: 2024:KHC:48905 MFA No. 856 of 2023

¶28

¶29

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:

¶30

ORDER

¶31

Miscellaneous First Appeal is dismissed.

¶32

Sd/(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

¶33

RHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21

Sri. R. Sampangi Ramaiah v. Sri. R Vasantharaju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. R. Sampangi Ramaiah v. Sri. R Vasantharaju

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. Mallikarjuna Residency Apartment Owner Association, Vs Mallikarjuna Builders and Developers

Smt. K N Prema Vs Sri. K Mohan

Lakshminarayanashetty Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Kumari Devika R Vs Smt.Puttalakshmamma

Smt Buela Selvaraj Vs Sri. J.L. Nathan

National Highway Authority of India Vs Sri. Jinnappa Gowda