Mrs B R Shylaja Vs Sri G v Sathish Reddy @ G v Satheesh Reddy

PLAINTIFF NOS.4 TO 6 ARE RESIDING AT RESIDING AT NO. 183, GUNJUR, BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU – 560 087. ALSO AT NO. 183, GUNJUR VILLAGE, BENGALURU EAST, BENGALURU – 560 087

¶26

…APPELLANTS

¶27

(BY SRI. DHANANJAY JOSHI, SR. ADVOCATE A/W SRI. VACHAN H.U, ADVOCATE)

¶28

AND:

¶29

SRI G V SATHISH REDDY

¶30

@ G V SATHEESH REDDY SON OF LATE G.T. VENKATASWAMY REDDY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT GUNJUR VILLAGE, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK - 560087

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:52815 MFA No. 1866 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

ALSO AT NALINI SATISH VIHAR, OPP. NAKSHA ACADEMY GUNJUR - NERIGE ROAD, GUNJUR POST, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU – 560 087

¶34

M/S. VIRTUESA TECHNOLOGIES AND SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED, A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 2013 REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 21, SAMARPAN ENCLAVE, ECC ROAD, WHITE FIELD, NEAR DEENS SCHOOL, BENGALURU- 560066. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR

¶35

…RESPONDENTS

¶36

(BY SRI. VISHWAS GOWDA G.M, ADVOCATE)

¶37

THIS MFA FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07.02.2025 PASSED ON I.A. NO. 1O.S.NO.5349/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE XXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, C/c XXXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH NO. 23), PARTLY ALLOWING THE I.A. NO.1 FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULES 1 AND 2 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC.

¶38

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

¶39

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:52815 MFA No. 1866 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶42

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶43

This appeal is filed by the plaintiffs in O.S.No.5349/2023 challenging the order dated 07.02.2025 passed on I.A.No.I filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC in O.S.No.5349/2023 on the file of XXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH No.23)¹ , thereby, the application filed seeking to grant an order of temporary injunction is allowed in part. So far as the plaintiffs are being aggrieved not to grant an order of temporary injunction in regard to restraining defendant No.1 or his agents not to encumber the suit schedule property in favour of third parties.

¶44

For the sake of convenience and easy reference, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court.

¶45

1 hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’ for short

¶46

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:52815 MFA No. 1866 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

The plaintiffs have filed the suit for declaration

¶49

and for perpetual injunction. The plaintiffs have filed an application I.A.No.I under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking prayer on two counts; one prayer is to restrain defendant No.1 or his agents from making alienation of the suit schedule property and the second relief sought is to restrain defendant No.1 or his agents from making encumbrance of the suit schedule property.

¶50

Initially, the Trial Court, while passing an order of exparte temporary injunction on 22.08.2023 had passed an order of exparte temporary injunction on both counts restraining defendant No.1/respondent No.1, his agents, servants or anybody acting on his behalf from alienating and also restraining them from encumbering the suit schedule property.

¶51

Further, the Trial Court while making an order

¶52

of exparte temporary injunction as absolute on

¶53

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:52815 MFA No. 1866 of 2025

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

07.02.2025, though allowed I.A.No.1 in part, granted an order of temporary injunction only restraining defendant No.1, his agents, servants or anybody acting on behalf of him only from alienating the suit schedule property, but has not passed an order not to encumber the suit schedule property.

¶56

The word ‘Encumber’ has its own significance

¶57

and has its legal meaning. The apprehension of the plaintiffs is crystallized due to the fact that when the Trail Court has passed an order of exparte temporary injunction on two counts restraining defendant No.1, his agents, servants or anybody acting on behalf of him from making alienation and also not to encumber, but during subsistence of the order of exparte temporary injunction, before the order was made absolute, defendant No.1 mortgaged the suit schedule property on 17.11.2025.

¶58

For which, in violation of the said order of

¶59

exparte temporary injunction, the plaintiffs have initiated

¶60

7 -

¶61

NC: 2025:KHC:52815 MFA No. 1866 of 2025

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

separate proceedings in Misc. Petition No.112/2025 and the same was dismissed. Against which, MFA No.2350 of 2025 is filed and the same is pending before this Court.

¶64

When the plaintiffs have prayed two reliefs against defendant No.1 upon the application I.A.No.I filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC, the Trial Court had granted an order of exparte temporary injunction on both counts, but while making the said order as absolute it only granted an order of temporary injunction restraining defendant No.1, his agents, servants or anybody acting on behalf of him from making alienation, but has not passed an order not to encumber the suit schedule property in favour of third parties. Hence, the appeal is liable to be allowed by granting an order of temporary injunction restraining respondent No.1/defendant No.1, his agents, servants or anybody acting on behalf of him from alienating the suit schedule property and also restraining them from

¶65

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:52815 MFA No. 1866 of 2025

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

encumbering the suit schedule property in favour of third parties by whatever mode.

¶68

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed with an

¶69

order of temporary injunction restraining respondent No.1/defendant No.1, his agents, servants or anybody acting on behalf of him from alienating and also from making encumbrance the suit schedule property in favour of third parties.

¶70

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

¶71

ORDER

¶72

i. The appeal is allowed .

¶73

ii. The order dated 07.02.2025 passed on I.A.No.I filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC, seeking to grant an order of temporary injunction, is modified to extent that respondent No.1/defendant No.1, his agents, servants or anybody acting on

¶74

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:52815 MFA No. 1866 of 2025

¶75

HC-KAR

¶76

behalf of him are restrained from making alienation and encumbrance over the suit schedule property in favour of third parties.

¶77

iii. No order as to costs.

¶78

SD/(HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE

¶79

SRA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Mrs B R Shylaja v. Sri G v Sathish Reddy @ G v Satheesh Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs B R Shylaja v. Sri G v Sathish Reddy @ G v Satheesh Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

National Highways Authority of India Vs Sri. K. Sudhakar Nayak

The Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs Gavirangaiah

B K Gurushanthappa Vs Assistant Commissioner

Mrs K Kalavathy Vs Mrs Rajakumari Bai

Smt. Seshamma Vs Sri. a. M. Rajanna

M/S Transport Corporation of India Ltd. Vs Sri P a Niranjan