Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3957 OF 2020 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. JAHNAVI W/O LATE N.S.MAHABALAGIRI RAO AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/O NARASIPURA VILLAGE GOWTRHAMAPURA POST SAGA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577412
2. DEEPAK KUMAR N.M.
S/O LATE N.S.MAHABALAGIRI RAO AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/O NARASIPURA VILLAGE GOWTRHAMAPURA POST SAGA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577412 Digitally signed by SHARANYA T
3. SMT. MADHAVI SUJENDRA Location: HIGH W/O SUJENDRA COURT OF KARNATAKA D/O LATE N.S.MAHABALAGIRI RAO AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
30, 3 RD CROSS, JUDICIAL OFFICERS LAYOUT SANJAYANAGAR BANGALORE-560094
4. PRADEEP KUMAR M.N.
S/O LATE N.S.MAHABALAGIRI RAO AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS COO4, ARUN PATIOS, DODDABALLAPUR ROAD KENCHENAHALLI, YELAHANKA BANGALORE-560064 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. JAYAPRAKASH R.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. B. SHOBHA W/O BALOASUBRAMANYA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/O KEREKOPPA P.O BHEEMANAKONE SAGAR TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577417
2. SMT. T.S. SHUBHA W/O T.G. SURESH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT 10/11, BALAJI NAGAR, 6A CROSS, OPP. P.M.K.BUS STOP KATRIGUPPE BENGALURU-560085
3. SMT. SANDHYA S.P.
W/O PRABHAKARA S, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS MUNGARAVALLI VILLAGE SAGAR TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577417
4. SMT. SMITHA G, W/O GURUPRASAD AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT MANCHALE VILLAGE SAGAR TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577417
5. RAGHAVENDRA N.N.
S/O N.S. NARAYANAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/O NARASIPURA VILLAGE SAGAR TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577417 …RESPONDENTS (VIDE ORDER DATED 22.07.2021, SRI B.R.DEEPAK, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02.06.2020 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN O.S.NO.48/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAGAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This miscellaneous first appeal is filed being aggrieved by the order passed by the Trial Court, wherein a restrain order has been passed restraining the plaintiffs from removing the trees and crop in respect of item No.2 of the suit schedule properties and also not to do any activities surrounding the said property.
3. It is the claim of the plaintiffs that already areca nut and coconut trees are cultivated in item No.2 of the suit schedule properties and the order passed is restraining the plaintiffs from removing areca nut and coconut trees and not the crops. It is also submitted that suit is filed for the relief of declaration and partition and with regard to removal of crop is concerned, the restraint order requires no interference. Hence, for the limited purpose, this miscellaneous first appeal requires to be allowed. The judgment of the Trial Court is modified, insofar as the crop is concerned, since both the counsel for the parties submit that almost evidence is completed and matter is at the fag end of consideration of the main appeal on merits. Hence, the restraint order passed with regard to removal of crop and cultivation is set aside.
Accordingly, this miscellaneous first appeal stands disposed of.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
