M Mamatha, D/O B.N.Madhusudana vs M Murali Madhusudana, S/O Sri.B.N.Madhusudana

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Kar) 71

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
M Mamatha, D/O B.N.Madhusudana – Appellant
Versus
M Murali Madhusudana, S/O Sri.B.N.Madhusudana – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sri C Shankar Reddy, Advocate
For the Respondent:Sri Manjunath Reddy, Advocate, Sri Varunpapireddy, Advocate, Sri A Devaraja, Advocate

Table of Content
1. dismissal based on lack of details. (Para 1 , 2)
2. historical context of lawsuits and claims. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. defendants argue against maintainability. (Para 6 , 7)
4. court's analysis on trial court's ruling. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
5. amendment necessity to avoid litigation. (Para 11 , 14 , 15)
6. court allows amendment and remands case. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
7. appeal allows part, concludes order. (Para 20)

JUDGMENT :

ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE, J.

This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dismissing the suit for mandatory injunction. The plaintiff sought mandatory injunction against the private individuals and the Banks. Suit is filed for relief of injunction to restrain defendants No.3 to 7 (Banks) from operating the Bank account standing in the name of deceased B.N.Maheshwari Madhusudhan and also to restrain the individual defendants from removing the gold ornaments kept in the safe deposit lockers in the aforementioned Banks in the name of deceased B.N.Maheshwari Madhusudhan.

2. The suit is dismissed on the premise that the details of the Bank lockers and the Savings Bank accounts are also not furnished. Hence, the plaintiff is before this Court.

3. Learned co