M.S. Arunkumar Vs Smt. C. Kamalamma

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:50221 WP No. 15785 of 2020

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 15785 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

M.S. ARUNKUMAR S/O M.C. SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/O H. MALLIGERE VILLAGE DUDDA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK AND ALSO R/AT BYRAVESHWARA NILAYA 7TH CROSS HALAHALLI EXTENTION MANDYA CITY - 571 436.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI PRAMOD R, ADV.)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SMT. C. KAMALAMMA W/O LATE M.P. MAYIGAIAH AGED 71 YEARS R/O H. MALLIGERE VILLAGE DUDDA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK AND ALSO R/AT NO.15 1ST STAGE MIG HOUSING BOARD COLONY MANDYA CITY -571 436.

¶13

(SERVED & UNREPRSENTED)

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ANNEXURE-G DTD.4.1.2020 PASSED BY II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MANDYA IN O.S.NO.675/2019 BY REJECTING THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC ON IN ANO.1 AND THE ORDER DTD.19.11.2020 AT ANNXURE-K PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE MANDYA IN MA NO.04/2020.

¶16

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:50221 WP No. 15785 of 2020

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

The plaintiff is before this Court under Article 227 of

¶23

the Constitution of India with a prayer to set aside the order dated 04.01.2020 passed on I.A.No.I in O.S.No.675 of 2019 by the Court of II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mandya and the judgment dated 19.11.2020 passed in M.A.No.4 of 2020 by the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mandya.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The respondent has remained unrepresented before this Court.

¶25

O.S.No.675 of 2019 was filed by the plaintiff before

¶26

the jurisdictional civil Court, Mandya with a prayer to grant decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant, her agents, servants or anybody on her behalf from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and also from putting up any kind of construction over any portion of the suit schedule property. The contesting defendant had filed his written statement in the said suit and has opposed the suit claim. I.ANo.I was filed on behalf of the plaintiff in O.S.No.675 of 2019 under Order XXXIX Rule 1

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:50221 WP No. 15785 of 2020

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

& 2 of CPC with a prayer to grant an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendant or anybody claiming her from putting up any kind of construction over any portion of the suit schedule property during the pendency of the suit. The said application was opposed by the defendant. The trial Court, vide the order impugned had rejected the said application and the said order was unsuccessfully challenged by the plaintiff in M.A.No.4 of 2020 which was dismissed by the appellate Court by judgment dated 19.11.2020. Aggrieved by the aforesaid two orders, the plaintiff is before this Court.

¶30

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that this Court while issuing notice to the respondent in this petition has directed the parties to maintain status quo insofar as construction is concerned in the suit schedule property. The said interim order granted on 08.07.2021 has been operating for the last more than four years. The respondent who is served in the matter has remained unrepresented before this Court.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court that the suit is at the stage of recording plaintiff's evidence. Under the circumstances, I am of the

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:50221 WP No. 15785 of 2020

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

opinion that if this writ petition is disposed of directing the trial Court to expedite the trial in O.S.No.675 of 2019 and dispose of the suit at the earliest and till then if the interim order granted by this Court directing the parties to maintain status quo with regard to construction in the suit schedule property is continued the same would serve the ends of justice.

¶35

6. Accordingly the following:-

¶36

ORDER

¶37

Writ petition is disposed of with a request to the trial Court to expedite the trial in O.S.No.675 of 2019 and dispose of the suit at the earliest and till the disposal of the suit, the interim order granted by this Court on 08.07.2021, directing the parties to maintain status quo insofar as construction is concerned in the suit schedule property, shall continue.

¶38

It is made clear that the trial Court shall dispose of the suit without being influenced by the observations made in the impugned orders challenged in this petition.

¶39

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶40

NMS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20

M.S. Arunkumar v. Smt. C. Kamalamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.S. Arunkumar v. Smt. C. Kamalamma

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

Sri.Puttaswamy Vs Smt.N.M.Rathna

Sathyavathi Vs Kashinath Rao

Bharatha Rathna Dr B R Ambedkar Socio Economic Culture Center Vs Smt Kalpana Govindaraj

Sri H S Aravind Vs M/S Margadarshi Chits (Karnataka) Pvt. Ltd.

Sri. H.B.Mallikarujunaiah Vs Sri.H.C. Siddalingaswamy

G v Govindaraju Vs Sri Rangaiah