B. Shankaranaika v. Krishnaniaka

Karnataka HC14 Nov 2025WP/32107/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC, W.P. No.32107/2024 (GM-CPC), decided 14.11.2025 by Justice Vijaykumar A. Patil. Article 227 writ petition challenging appellate order dated 16.10.2024 in M.A.No.12/2023 (Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Arsikere) that vacated interim injunction granted 19.02.2022 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC in O.S.No.307/2021 (permanent injunction). Petition disposed without expressing opinion on merits; status quo in respect of suit item No.2 continued till disposal of suit; Trial Court to proceed on merits; no costs. No precedent cases cited.

What did the court decide?

Parties directed to maintain status quo in respect of suit item No.2 till the disposal of the suit; Trial Court to proceed with the suit on merits; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stand disposed of. ¶¶44

B. Shankaranaika Vs Krishnaniaka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:46869 W.P. No.32107/2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.32107/2024 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

B. SHANKARANAIKA S/O LATE BHEEMANAIKA AGED 71 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST R/OF. AGGUNDA B. TANDYA, AGGUNDA POST KASABA HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT 573103.

¶9

Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court Of Karnataka

¶10

(BY SRI. A.V. GANGADHARAPPA, ADV.,)

¶11

AND:

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

KRISHNANIAKA S/O LATE HANUMANAIKA AGED 47 YEARS.

¶14

RAVINAIKA S/O KRISHNANAIKA AGED 33 YEARS.

¶15

BOTH ARE AGRICULTURISTS R/OF. AGGUNDA B. TANDYA AGGUNDA POST, KASABA HOBLI ARASIKERE TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT 573103.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. KAMALA D.K. ADV., FOR R1 R2 IS SERVED)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:46869 W.P. No.32107/2024

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE ORDER DTD 16.10.2024 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT ARASIKERE IN MA NO.12/2023, CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNX-J AND BE PLEASED TO DISMISS MA NO.12/2023 BY HOLDING THAT THE APPELLATE COURT CANNOT SUBSTITUTE ITS DISCRETION WITH THAT OF THE DISCUSSION EXERCISED BY THE TRIAL COURT UNLESS GROUND ARE MADE OUT & ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

This petition is filed challenging the order dated 16.10.2024 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Arsikere in M.A.No.12/2023.

¶26

Sri.A.V.Gangadharappa, learned counsel

¶27

appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has

¶28

filed a suit for permanent injunction. Based on the documents made available, the Trial Court has considered the application filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and allowed the same.

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:46869 W.P. No.32107/2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Being aggrieved, the respondents have challenged the same in M.A.No.12/2023. However, the Appellate Court, without considering the material on record in its proper perspective, proceeded to allow the appeal by vacating the interim order granted by the Trial Court. It is submitted that this Court has granted an interim order on 11.02.2025 directing the parties to maintain status quo and if the said status quo is continued till the disposal of the suit, ends of justice would be met.

¶32

Smt.Kamala D.K., learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 submits that they have filed a detailed written statement and thereafter, considering the documents available, the Appellate Court rightly interfered with the order of the Trial Court granting injunction. Hence, she seeks to sustain the order.

¶33

I have heard the arguments of the learned

¶34

counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and perused the material available on

¶35

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:46869 W.P. No.32107/2024

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

record. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced on both the sides.

¶39

The petitioner has filed O.S.No.307/2021 for the relief of permanent injunction. In the said suit, he has filed I.A.No.1 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC, which came to be allowed by the Trial Court vide order dated 19.02.2022. The said order was assailed in M.A.No.12/2023 by the respondents which was allowed and the order of the Trial Court granting injunction was set aside. It is to be noticed that the pleadings in the suit are completed and the issues are required to be framed. The interest of justice would be met if the interim order granted by this Court on 11.02.2025 is continued till the disposal of the suit by directing the Trial Court to proceed with the suit on merits.

¶40