Smt Leena Abraham Vs Byju Joseph

BYJU JOSEPH AGED 45 YEARS, S/O TJ VARGHESE RESIDING AT (1) NO.4/1, 5^TH CROSS, THARAMANNIL HOUSE, MUDDANNA GARDEN, VALAGARAHALLI ROAD, HARSHA LAYOUT, KENGERI BANGALORE-560 060

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:24307 WP No. 26650 of 2024

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

AND ALSO RESIDING AT (2) BYJU JOSEPH, PROJECT MANAGER M/S INTELLIGENT SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS PVT.LTD, 2A/3^RD FLOOR, SOBHA ALEXANDER PLAZA, 16/2, COMMISSIONARAT ROAD, BENGALURU -560 025 ALSO RESIDING AT (3) NO.6-7-14, MINAMI YOSHINARI, AOBA-KU SENDAI, MIYAGI, 989-3204 JAPAN

¶22

…RESPONDENT

¶23

(BY SMT.BHUSHANI KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO GRANT TEMPORARY INJUCTION IN THE EXISTING CASE OS 416/2022 BEFORE III ADDL. COURT, PRL. FAMILY JUDGE BENGALURU TILL THE DISPOSAL OF OS 416/2022 BEFORE III ADDITIONAL COURT, PRL. FAMILY JUDGE BENGALURU VIDE IA NO. 1/2024.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

The writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:

¶29

“Wherefore, the petitioners pray that this Honorable Court may be pleased to issue a writ directing the III Addl. Prl. Family Judge at Bengaluru.

¶30

1. To grant permanent injunction restraining the defendant and his henchmen, heirs, representatives or anybody from any way

¶31

3 -

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:24307 WP No. 26650 of 2024

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintiff in the existing case O.S.No.416/2022 before III Addl. Court, Prl. Family Judge, Bengaluru vide Annexure A1 to A3.

¶35

2. To direct the III Addl. Court, Prl. Family Judge, Bengaluru to execute settlement terms in O.P.1415/2021 as it is the first petition between the same parties before proceeding with any other cases between the same parties vide Annexure A1 to A3.

¶36

3. To direct the III Addl. Court, Prl. Family Judge, Bengaluru to direct the respondent to submit release deed of the suit schedule property vide Annexure A1 to A3.

¶37

4. To direct the III Addl. Court, Prl. Family Judge, Bengaluru to mark the petitioner evidence and related evidences of O.S.No.416/2022 in English vide Annexure B1 to B3.

¶38

5. To direct the III Addl. Court, Prl. Family Judge, Bengaluru not to precipitate any matters in the absence and affidavit of the petitioners.

¶39

6. Allowing the petitioner to realise the cost of this petition from the defendant and their assets.

¶40

7. Allowing such other reliefs as are warranted in the circumstances of the petition and found fit and proper by this Honourable Court to meet the ends of justice and equity.”

¶41

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:24307 WP No. 26650 of 2024

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

The present writ petition is filed questioning the order passed in O.S.No.416/2022 dated 10.09.2024 by the III Addl. Court, Prl. Family Judge, Bengaluru, wherein the Family Court had observed that through the order dated 18.04.2024, interim order dated 16.01.2023 was extended for 3 months. As on today interim orders dated 16.01.2023 is not in force. For want of court time, further chief-examination of PW1 deferred to 29.10.2024 and directed the matter to be called along with MC.No.3129/2023, MC.No.209/2022 and Crl.Misc. No.592/2022.

¶44

The party-in-person, who is the plaintiff in the suit, had filed a suit seeking permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. By order dated 16.01.2023, the Family Court had granted an order restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property in any manner by way of an ad-interim temporary injunction till the next date of hearing.

¶45

The petitioner/party-in-person submits the Family Court ought to have extended the said interim order. If the

¶46

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:24307 WP No. 26650 of 2024

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

interim injunction is vacated, it would cause lot of hardship to the petitioner. Apart from this, it is submitted by the party in person that she had also sought for several other reliefs before this Court in the prayer. The prayer No.2 is to direct the III Addl. Court, Prl. Family Judge, Bengaluru to execute settlement in terms of O.P.No.1415/21 as it is the first petition between the same parties before proceeding with any other cases between the same parties, to direct the Family Court to direct the respondent to submit release deed of the suit schedule property, to direct the Family Judge, Bengaluru to mark the petitioner's evidence and related evidences of O.S.No.416/2022 in English, to direct the Family Court not to precepitate any matters in the absence and affidavit of the petitioners. Allow the petitioner to release the cost of this petition from the defendant and their assets. Party in person further submits that this Court may pass direction to the Family Court as sought by her in the prayer.

¶49

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/ husband submits that an affidavit is filed stating that the

¶50

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:24307 WP No. 26650 of 2024

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

respondent will not interfere with the suit schedule property pending disposal of the petition.

¶53

Having heard the party in person and the learned counsel for the respondent/husband, perused the material on record. The writ petition is filed questioning an order where the Family Court had failed to extend the interim order. In the light of the affidavit that is filed before this Court, the interim injunction that is granted by the Family Court is made absolute. Then coming to the other prayers that the party in person is seeking, this Court cannot grant any of the prayers that are sought and this Court is passing the orders exercising the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. If the party in person wants to file any application before the Family Court, she is at liberty to file the application and seek an order from the Family Court. The party-in-person is not able to understand the scope of the petition and coming up with petitions one after the other. She is wasting her time as well as the Court’s time. All the prayers that are sought for by her are beyond the scope of the petition. In future she shall

¶54

7 -

¶55

NC: 2025:KHC:24307 WP No. 26650 of 2024

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

engage the advocate from Legal Services Authority and in this manner she cannot waste the Court’s time.

¶58

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent has filed an affidavit that they will not interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the plaint schedule property. In the light of the affidavit, this writ petition can be disposed of.

¶59

Hence, this Court is passing the following:

¶60

ORDER

¶61

i. In the light of the affidavit filed by the respondent that they will not interfere pending disposal of the suit, the writ petition is “ disposed of ” and the interim injunction that is granted is made absolute.

¶62

ii. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed.

¶63

SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

¶64

BN

¶65

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0

Smt Leena Abraham v. Byju Joseph

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Leena Abraham v. Byju Joseph

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

Kum U Divya Vs Sri Murali M

Smt. Padmaja Gogi Vs Madhu S Rao

Puneesh S Vs Sandhya

Sri.Harish S Vs Smt.Amulya.K

Shri Mayur Nayak Vs Smt H Aparna Pai

Mr. Shankar Chowdhury Vs Ms. Payal Bhowmick