Disposed

Shri. Ashok Sidram Wadeyar v. the Superintendent of Police

Karnataka HC6 Nov 2024WP/104779/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought mandamus to act on their complaint regarding interference with pooja at a temple, citing decreed injunction suits. The court declined to decide entitlement, disposed of the writ reserving liberty to approach the Civil Court for interim orders, and directed police to initiate Section 107 Cr.P.C. proceedings to maintain peace.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shri. Ashok Sidram Wadeyar Vs the Superintendent of… — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195 WP No. 104779 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶3

DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 06^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 104779 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHRI ASHOK SIDRAM WADEYAR, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶10

SHRI CHANDAR SIDRAM WADEYAR, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶11

MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶12

SHRI MALAKARI RAMAPPA WADEYAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶13

SHRI ANIL MALAKARI WADEYAR, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶14

SHRI MARUTI MALAKARI WADEYAR, AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶15

SHRI KUMAR MARUTI WADEYAR, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195 WP No. 104779 of 2024

¶17

SHRI PRAKASH MARUTI WADEYAR, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶18

SHRI SHEKHAR SHRIMANT WADEYAR, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶19

SHRI SANTHOSH SHRIMANT WADEYAR, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶20

SHRI MAHANTESH SHRIMANT WADEYAR, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶21

. SHRI JAGADISH SHRIMANT WADEYAR, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶22

. SHRI ANAND SHRIMANT WADEYAR, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALPARATTI-591311, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. …PETITIONERS

¶23

(BY SRI SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE,) AND: 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BELAGAVI DISTRICT, BELAGAVI-590001, TQ/DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶24

THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR, HARUGERI POLICE STATION, HARUGERI-591220, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI V.S. KALASURAMTH, HCGP.)

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195 WP No. 104779 of 2024

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE ACCUSED MENTIONED IN THE COMPLAINT DATED 26.03.2024 BY CONSIDERING THE SAID COMPLAINT AS PER ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.,.

¶28

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for respondents No.1 and 2.

¶32

2. This petition is filed by the petitioners seeking a writ of mandamus for a direction to the respondent authorities to take action on the basis of the complaint dated 26.03.2024. The petitioners contend that their forefathers are the trustees of Aranya Sidda Deva Temple at Khemalapur and Yalaparatti village and they are performing pooja of the said deity without any obstructions. Petitioners were constrained to initiate a suit in O.S.No.24/1984 before the Civil Court for the relief of permanent injunction against the rival party and the said suit came to be decreed on 17.04.1985. The defendants therein filed a suit in

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195 WP No. 104779 of 2024

¶34

O.S.No.47/1973 before the Principal Munsiff, Chikodi, for permanent injunction not to interfere with the performance of pooja in this Aranya Sidda Deva Temple. The said suit also came to be decreed, confirmed in R.A.No.143/1981, which was assailed in RSA No.297/1987 and the same came to be dismissed affirming the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. Thereafter the petitioners filed another suit in O.S.NO.146/2018, seeking for the relief of declaration that they are the owners and for consequential relief of permanent injunction. The said suit is pending consideration, which is pending between the rival parties.

¶35

3. This being the state of affairs, petitioners have lodged a complaint on 26.03.2024 before the 2^nd respondent to initiate action against one Chamaraj Kushal Wadeyar and others and it is the grievance of the petitioners that the said complaint has not acted upon by the respondents. Hence, they are before this Court.

¶36

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that

¶37

since several decades there are disputes between rival parties with regard to conducting pooja and suits are being

¶38

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195 WP No. 104779 of 2024

¶39

filed and injunctions having been obtained by both parties at one time or the other. Presently a suit is filed which is pending adjudication for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction, wherein no temporary injunction or relief is granted. Under the circumstances, the present complaint is filed to take action against the rival party.

¶40

5. Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for respondents submits that this is not the first time that the issue has cropped up between the rival parties, i.e., the petitioners and the persons alleged to be interfering and the respondent police have initiated proceedings under section 107 of Cr.P.C. to maintain peace and tranquility in the area and not to create any law and order situation. One such preventive action, report has been filed dated 10.03.2024 and the parties are advised not to create any law and order situation. It is also submitted by learned HCGP that in case there is any disturbance that is created, the petitioners would be at liberty to avail the remedy available to them in the Civil Court by approaching the Court for necessary relief in the pending litigation rather than filing this complaint as

¶41

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16195 WP No. 104779 of 2024

¶42

the respondents cannot decide as to who are the authorised persons legally entitled to perform the pooja.

¶43

6. Under the circumstances, this petition is

¶44

disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioners to approach the Civil Court to obtain necessary interim orders as advised and in the manner known to law.

¶45

7. In the meanwhile, the respondents shall direct both the parties once again pursuant to the complaint dated 26.03.2024 and shall initiate proceedings under section 107 of Cr.P.C. for both the parties to maintain peace and tranquility as the Temple is involved in the litigation, involving several devotees visiting the temple to pay obeisance.

¶46

Ordered accordingly.

¶47

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶48

MRK CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11

Shri. Ashok Sidram Wadeyar v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shri. Ashok Sidram Wadeyar v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Drakshayani D/O Swarevva Pujar Vs the State of Karnataka

Mallappa S/O Parappa Kumbar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Channappa S/O Subbanna Vs the Principal Secretary

The Principal Vs the Registrar

Lakshman Murthy Naik Alias Laxman Naik Vs State of Karnataka

Dhannappa S/O. Harishchandra Naik Vs the State of Karnataka