The appellate court upheld the lower court's decree for injunction and permitted ongoing construction by the respondent, subject to the final decision in a related suit.

JUDGMENT :

S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.

Both these appeals arise out of the impugned common judgment and decree dated 14.11.2024 passed in O.S.No.25028/2022 and O.S.No.25029/2022, whereby the said suits filed by the respondent – plaintiff against the appellants – defendants was decreed by the trial court in favour of the respondent – plaintiff against the appellants – defendants.

2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondent – plaintiff filed the instant suits for permanent injunction and for other reliefs against the appellants in relation to the suit schedule immovable property involved in both the suits. The said suits having been contested by the appellants – defendants, the trial court proceeded to pass the impugned common judgment and decree, decreeing the suits filed by the respondent against the appellants, as hereunder:-

ORDER

The suit of the plaintiffs in OS.No.25028/2022 and OS.No.25029/2022 are hereby decreed with costs.

The defendants are hereby restrained from interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of both suits schedule properties.

Draw Decree accordingly.”

3. Heard learned Senior counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

4. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that it is an undisputed fact that during the pendency of the aforesaid suits before the trial court, the appellants – defendants have jointly filed one more suit in O.S.No.3252/2023 against the respondent – plaintiff herein and others seeking comprehensive relief of declaration, injunction and other reliefs etc., in relation to the very same suit schedule property and the larger extent of the property comprised in Sy.No.76 measuring 31 guntas, out of which, the present suit schedule property is situated. The aforesaid comprehensive suit for declaration, mandatory injunction and possession and other reliefs, a copy of which is produced and marked as Ex.D88, reads as under:-

“MEMORANDUM OF PLAINT UNDER ORDER VII, RULE-1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

The plaintiffs above named humbly begs to submit as follows:

1. The address of the plaintiff for the purpose of service of notices summons, etc., from this Hon’ble Court is as shown in the cause title above and that of their counsel Sri.J.Prakash, Advocate, No.315, III Floor, Kurubarasangha Building, 2^nd Main Gandhi Nagara, Bengaluru – 560009. The address of the defendant for the purpose of service of notice as stated in the cause title. Mobile No.9880432986, email-jprakashadvs69@gmail.com.

2. The plaintiffs submit that the one Hotte Mariyappa is the propositus of the family of the plaintiff and defendant No.1 to 11. It is further submit that the said Hotte Mariyappa having four sons namely(1) Munivenkatappa, (2) Pillannaiah @ Venkataramanappa, (3) Venkataswamy @ Papanna and (4) Muniswamy Mogappa. All the four sons and their respective wives are also no more now. For the better understanding of the relationship of the parties the Genealogical Tree is produced for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court and marked as DOCUMENT No.1. The first son late Munivenkatappa having a wife by name Smt. Munlakkayamma @ Akkayamma ang his only son Krishnappa and one daughter Lakshmamma, she is also no more now. The said Krishnappa having a wife by name SV having two sons and two daughters i.e., plaintiffs No.1 to 4 are before this Hon'ble Court.

3. The Plaintiffs further submit that the property bearing Survey No.76 having totally measuring 3 Acres 4 Guntas was purchased under the sale deed dated 6.1.1908 on behalf of the joint family by the propositus as stated about. The same is produced and marked as DOCUMENT No.2. After the de