The petitioner - plaintiff filed the present writ petition against the order dated 8.8.2017 on I.A. No.2 made in M.A. No.16/2017 on the file of the IV Addl. District Judge, Mysuru rejecting the application filed by the petitioner – plaintiff under the provisions of Section 141 r/w Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure.

2. The petitioner who is the plaintiff in the trial Court had filed O.S. No.1049/2012 for Permanent Injunction against the respondent - defendant, contending that he is the owner in possession of the suit schedule property morefully described in the plaint and the defendant has no manner of right, title and interest to interfere with the same. The defendant filed the written statement and denied the plaint averments and contended that the suit filed by the plaintiff for Permanent Injunction is not maintainable etc.

3. On the basis of the pleadings, the trial Court framed four issues for consideration.

4. In order to establish her case, the plaintiff examined her General Power of Attorney holder – Mohammed Rafiq as PW.1 and got marked the documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P32. The defendant examined himself as DW.1 and got marked the documents Ex.D1 to Ex.D11.

5. The trial Court considering the entire material on record by the Judgment & Decree dated 7.2.2017 dismissed the suit.

6. Aggrieved by the said Judgment & Decree, the petitioner – plaintiff filed R.A. No.36/2017 before the Prl. Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Mysuru. Along with the said appeal, the petitioner - plaintiff also filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 r/w Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure and sought for an ad-interim order of Temporary Injunction. The respondent - defendant filed objections to the said application. The Prl. Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Mysuru after hearing both the parties by an order dated 13.4.2017 allowed I.A. No.1 filed by the petitioner – plaintiff and granted the order of Temporary Injunction.

7. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Mysuru, the respondent – defendant filed M.A. No.16/2017 under Order XLIII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure before the District Judge, Mysuru. When the appeal was pending before the District Judge, the petitioner – plaintiff filed an application under the provisions of Section 141 r/w Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure to dismiss the appeal as not maintainable, contending that the trial Court dismissed the suit holding that she is in physical possession of the property wherein she is carrying on the business; Against the said Judgment & Decree, the appeal came to be filed and in the appeal, Temporary Injunction was granted in her favour; Against the order of granting Temporary Injunction, M.A. No.16/2017 came to be filed by the respondent – defendant before the District Court under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of Code of Civil Procedure; Since no miscellaneous appeal would lie from the order of the appellate Court passed on the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure under the provisions of Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of Code of Civil Procedure, M.A. No.16/2017 is not maintainable and therefore sought to dismiss the said appeal as not maintainable. The same was opposed by the present respondent – defendant contending that the value of the suit schedule property was less than Rs.5,00,000/-; Therefore the plaintiff filed the suit before the II Addl. First Civil Judge, Mysuru; After dismissal of the suit, plaintiff filed R.A. No.36/2017 before the Prl. Senior Civil Judge & CJM, who granted Temporary Injunction for the first time in favour of the plaintiff. Therefore appeal was maintainable before the District Judge under Order XLIII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure. Hence he sought to dismiss the application.

8. The learned District Judge, Mysuru considering the application filed by the petitioner - plaintiff under Section 141 r/w Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure and the objections filed by the respondent - defendant by the