Sakamma v. Nagesha

Karnataka HC10 Nov 2025WP/32469/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; WP No. 32469 of 2025 (GM-CPC); writ of mandamus; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC temporary injunction application pending; Order XXXIX Rule 3A CPC thirty-day disposal mandate; direction for expeditious disposal of I.A.No.II in O.S. No.124/2025; Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Holenarasipura, Hassan District; delay in disposal of interim injunction application; no notice to respondents; no opinion on merits; Pradeep Singh Yerur J; 10.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Holenarasipura directed to dispose of I.A.No.II under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC in O.S. No.124/2025 within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order; no opinion expressed on merits. ¶order

Sakamma Vs Nagesha — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶order

Issue for consideration

Whether the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Holenarasipura should be directed to dispose of I.A.No.II (temporary injunction application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC) in O.S. No.124/2025 expeditiously, having regard to Order XXXIX Rule 3A CPC. +1 more

¶5

Court's answer

Order XXXIX Rule 3A CPC contemplates disposal of an interim injunction application within thirty days; it is obligatory on the trial Court to dispose of the application on merits after hearing both parties and not to prolong the matter.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

No notice to the respondents was required, since no relief is sought against them and no adverse order is passed against them; the only relief sought is a direction to the trial Court to dispose of the Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC application expeditiously.

¶3

Key takeaways

A direction is issued to the Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Holenarasipura to dispose of I.A.No.II filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC in O.S. No.124/2025 within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶order
The Court expressly did not express any opinion on the merits of the matter.obiter¶order

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (GM-CPC) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India filed by defendant Nos. 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8 in O.S. No.124/2025 (Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Holenarasipura) seeking a writ of mandamus directing the trial Court to dispose of I.A.No.II under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC (temporary injunction restraining sale, lease or alienation of suit schedule properties), pending for over a year. Held: Order XXXIX Rule 3A CPC contemplates disposal of such an application within thirty days, and it is obligatory on the trial Court to dispose of the application on merits after hearing both parties and not to prolong the matter. Notice to respondents was dispensed with as no relief was sought against them and no adverse order was passed against them. Petition allowed; trial Court directed to dispose of I.A.No.II within thirty days from receipt of copy of the order, without expression of opinion on merits. (Pradeep Singh Yerur, J.; decision dated 10 November 2025.)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:46006 WP No. 32469 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 32469 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SAKAMMA

¶10

D/O. LATE ERARAIAH W/O. AMASAIAH AED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT NYGERE VILLAGE

¶11

KASABA HOBLI

¶12

ANKANAYAKANAHALLI POST KASABA HOBLI ARAKALAGUD TALUK HASSAN DIST. - 573 201.

¶13

RANGAMMA

¶14

W/O. PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

¶15

R/AT ADAGURU VILLAGE

¶16

Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH

¶17

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶18

A. CHOLANAHALLI POST

¶19

KASABA HOBLI CHANNARAYAPATTANA TALUK HASSAN DIST. - 573 201.

¶20

DHARMARAJ,

¶21

S/O. LATE MUTTAIAH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS

¶22

R/AT HUCCHANAKOPPALU VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI HOLENARASIPURA TALUK HASSAN DIST. - 573 201.

¶23

MEENAKSHI

¶24

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:46006 WP No. 32469 of 2025

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

D/O. SANNAMANJAIAH W/O. LATE MANJAYAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT VADDARAHALLI VILLAGE BICHANAHALLI POST HALEKOTE HOBLI HOLENARSIPURA TALUK HASSAN DIST. - 573 201.

¶27

SANNA @ SANNAIAH S/O. LATE RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT NYGERE VILLAGE ANKANAYAKANAHALLI POST KASABA HOBLI ARAKALAGUDU TALUK HASSAN DIST. - 573 201.

¶28

…PETITIONERS

¶29

(BY SRI GIRISH B. BALADARE., ADVOCATE)

¶30

AND:

¶31

NAGESHA S/O. LATE CHANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT HUCCHANAKOPPALU VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI HOLENARASIPURA TALUK HASSAN DIST. - 573 201.

¶32

PARAMESHA S/O. LATE CHANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT HUCHANAKOPPALU VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI HOLENARASIPURA TALUK HASSAN DIST. - 573201.

¶33

SAVITHRAMMA D/O. LATE ERAIAH W/O. HARADURAIAH

¶34

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:46006 WP No. 32469 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT ULIVALA VILLAGE SINGAPURA POST KASABA HOBLI HOLENARASIPURA TALUK HASSAN DIST. - 573 201.

¶37

4. DEVAMMA

¶38

D/O. LATE ERAIAH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT ULIVALA VILLAGE SINGAPURA POST KASABA HOBLI HOLENARASIPURA TALUK HASSAN DIST. - 573 201.

¶39

…RESPONDENTS

¶40

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, DIRECTIONS TO THE HON'BLE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HOLENARASIPURA, HASSAN DISTRICT IN O.S.NO.124/2025 TO DISPOSE THE APPLICATIONS FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULES 1 AND 2 OF CPC, WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HOLENARASIPURA AS PER ANNEXURE-M IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶41

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

¶42

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC:46006 WP No. 32469 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶46

ORAL ORDER

¶47

Heard learned counsel for petitioner.

¶48

This petition is filed by the petitioners - defendant Nos.2, 5, 6, 7 and 8 seeking following reliefs:

¶49

"Wherefore the petitioner respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to

¶50

a) Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directions to the Hon'ble Additional Civil Judge and JMFC at Holenarasipura, Hassan Dist in O.S.124/2025 to dispose the applications filed under order 39 rule 1 and 2 of CPC which is pending before the Hon'ble Additional Civil Judge and JMFC at Holenarasipura as per Annexure-M in the interest of justice and equity.

¶51

b) Grant such others relief's as this Hon'ble court deems fir in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."

¶52

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:46006 WP No. 32469 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

This Court does not find any need to issue notice

¶55

to the respondents as no relief is sought against them and

¶56

so also no adverse order is passed against them. The only relief that is sought in the present writ petition is to direct

¶57

the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Holenarasipura to dispose of the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC in O.S. No.124/2025 expeditiously.

¶58

It is the contention of learned counsel for

¶59

petitioners that suit came to be filed on 10.03.2025 for declaration and Permanent Injunction. Along with the plaint, respondent No.1-plaintiff filed IA.No.I under Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC seeking to dispense the issuance of

¶60

prior notice against the defendants and the same is allowed by the trial Court. He also filed IA.No.II under

¶61

Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC to restrain the defendants not to sell, lease or alienate the suit schedule properties to others until the judgment of the suit by way of temporary injunction, but the trial Court had issued emergent notice on IA.No.II and suit summons to the

¶62

¶63

NC: 2025:KHC:46006 WP No. 32469 of 2025

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

defendants. The plaintiff and other defendants are taking time for one or the other reason without addressing arguments on the said interim application. Hence, petitioners are before this Court for a direction to the trial

¶66

Court to dispose of the application expeditiously.

¶67

Order XXXIX Rule 3A of CPC contemplates disposal of the application within thirty (30) days. The plaintiff has prolonged the matter more than a year. The trial Court has also not passed orders on the said application yet. Under the circumstances, it is obligatory on the part of the trial Court to dispose of the application on merits after hearing both parties and not to prolong the matter.

¶68

In view of the above, having regard to the

¶69

provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3A of CPC, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the trial Court to dispose of

¶70

I.A. filed Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC expeditiously.

¶71

¶72

NC: 2025:KHC:46006 WP No. 32469 of 2025

¶73

HC-KAR

¶74

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶75

ORDER

¶76

i) The petition is allowed .

¶77

ii) A direction is issued to the Additional Civil

¶78

Judge & JMFC, Holenarasipura to dispose of I.A.No.II filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC in O.S. No.124/2025 within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of copy of this order;

¶79

iii) This Court has not expressed any opinion

¶80

on merits of the matter.

¶81

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶82

CPN

¶83

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43

Sakamma v. Nagesha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sakamma v. Nagesha

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 Bharath Jaganathan Vs Senthil

Sri Muniyappa Vs Sri Venkateshappa Alias Mariyappa

Miss. Ramola. U. S. Vs Sri. B. I. Hemanth Kumar

N C Venkatesh Vs J Shashirekha

Mr. Kiran. M Vs Vijayanagara Club

Sri Jayarama Vs Sri Arunkumar H R