Murthy Textiles and Tailor Vs Smt. Archana D T

MURTHY TEXTILES AND TAILOR REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI KRISHNAMURTY ALIAS MURTHY S/O MALLESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, DUMMI COMPLEX, P.B.ROAD, CHITRADURGA TOWN, CHIRADURGA DISTRICT - 577501 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JAYAPRAKASH R.V., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by KRISHNAPPA LAXMI YASHODA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SMT. ARCHANA D T D/O LATE D P THIPPESWAMY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE, C/O SREE MYLARALINGESWARA NILAYA, 1ST FLOOR, 2ND CROSS, JCR EXTENSION, CHITRADURGA TOWN, CHITHRADURGA DISTRICT - 577501

¶12

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI.M.G. KANTHARAJAPPA., ADVOCATE)

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH ANNEXURE-E, THE ORDER DATED 10.07.2025 PASSED ON I.A.NO.XIV IN O.S.NO.135/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE 1^ST ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHITRADURGA AND ETC.

¶14

2 -

¶15

NC: 2025:KHC:42003 WP No. 27460 of 2025

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

Learned Counsel Sri.M.G.Kantharajappa, has entered appearance for the respondent.

¶21

The plaintiff/respondent herein had filed the suit in O.S.No.135/2019, seeking eviction of the defendant/ petitioner herein from the suit schedule property, which is a commercial shop. The suit was filed in the year 2019 and the evidence of the parties have already been recorded. At this stage an application in I.A.No.14 was filed by the petitioner/defendant under Section 94(e) read with Section 151 of CPC seeking directions to the plaintiff to return the clothes and stocks kept in the shop premises along with sewing machines, cash and cheque book and book of accounts, etc., and seeking a direction to the plaintiff to hand over possession of the petition schedule property to the defendant. It is contented by the

¶22

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:42003 WP No. 27460 of 2025

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

petitioner/defendant that the plaintiff/respondent has illegally broke open the lock put on the suit schedule property on 30.05.2025, he has taken away all the material belonging to the defendant in the shop and put a separate lock on the premises and thereby taking law into his hands. The Trial Court, however, is of the opinion that no material particulars are given by the defendant regarding the clothes, sewing machine, cheque book, cash etc., and has accordingly rejected the application.

¶25

However, to a pointed question put to the learned Counsel for the respondent/plaintiff as to what is the finding of the Trial Court regarding the possession, when the plaintiff has filed a suit for eviction and at what point of time the possession was handed over to the plaintiff voluntarily by the defendant, there is no answer from the learned Counsel for the respondent/plaintiff. The learned Counsel only submits that the defendant has voluntarily

¶26

handed over the premises and therefore, the plaintiff has put up a lock on the shop premises. It is also sought to be

¶27

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:42003 WP No. 27460 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

contented that the defendant is making use of the shop premises for illegal activities such as gambling and therefore, he has lodged a complaint to the jurisdictional police in that regard.

¶30

Having heard the learned Counsels on both the sides, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Trial Court has misdirected itself while concentrating only on the movable material said to be in the shop premises, while not applying its mind to the fact that the plaintiff has filed the suit for eviction and for arrears of rent and it cannot be contented now at the hands of the plaintiff that the defendant has voluntarily handed over the shop premises. Moreover, when the application also seeks for a direction to hand over possession to the defendant, the Trial Court should have necessarily considered that aspect of the matter. The Trial Court has not considered the application in its entirety.

¶31

In that view of the matter, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

¶32

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:42003 WP No. 27460 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

ORDER

¶35

(i) The writ petition is allowed .

¶36

(ii) The impugned order dated 10.07.2025 passed on I.A.No.14, in O.S.No.135/2019, at Annexure-E, is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶37

(iii) The matter stands remitted back to the Trial Court to reconsider I.A.No.14 filed by the defendant and the Trial Court is required to consider each and every prayer made in the application, including the question of handing over possession to the defendant.

¶38

Ordered accordingly.

¶39

(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶40

DL CT: JL

Murthy Textiles and Tailor v. Smt. Archana D T

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murthy Textiles and Tailor v. Smt. Archana D T

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

A Vijayakumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Sweta Singh Vs Sri Sai Raghava Developers

Sri.R. Siddaramaiah @ Siddramaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

The Secretary to Government Vs Smt Nagamma

Jeetendra Kumar Rajan Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Jayadevaiah Hiremath Vs Sri. M. R. Krishna Reddy