ORDER

CRP No.64/2021:

1. The Plaintiffs are before this Court seeking to set aside the judgment and decree dated 04.04.2019 passed by II Additional Senior Civil Judge & CJM., Mangaluru in S.C.No.26/2019 inasmuch as the plaint in the said suit came to be rejected by allowing I.A.No.3 filed by the respondent therein.

CRP No.96/2021:

2. The Plaintiffs are before this Court seeking to set aside the order dated 04.04.2019 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge & CJM., Mangaluru, D.K., in S.C.No.26/2019 dismissing I.A.No.2 filed by the Plaintiffs for restoration of electricity supply to the Plaintiff’s Apartment.

FACTS

3. The suit in S.C.No.26/2019 was filed before the Court of Small Causes, Mangalore under Section 26 read with Order VII Rule 1, 2 and 3 of CPC read with Section 13 of the Karnataka Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and transfer) Act, 1972 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as ‘the KOFA’). In the said suit, the Plaintiffs had sought the following reliefs:

“(a) pass a decree of mandatory injunction in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendant, directing the Defendant, its agents, servants, employees to restore the electricity supply to the apartment No.403 mentioned in schedule:

(b) Pass any orders or orders which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendant.”

4. In the plaint, it was contended that

4.1. The Plaintiffs are the owners of the Apartment bearing No.403 of Maurishka Park “B” Condominium, having purchased the same by virtue of the sale deed dated 24.10.2014 as document No.4554 in the office of the Sub-

Registrar, Mangalore.

4.2. The Plaintiffs contended that they were regular and prompt in making payment of electricity bills and had never refused the payment of any amounts.

4.3. It is alleged that recently an association by the name ‘Mourishka Park Apartment Owners Association’ was formed illegally by few members of the condominium without following the requisite conditions mentioned in the Declaration and Deed of Apartment or mentioned in the Karnataka State Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 or any other law governing the same.

4.4. The Association was formed by a few of the owners, not by all the owners; it is not a registered association. The Plaintiffs are not agreeable for the same or for certain persons being elected as President or Secretary, or Treasurer.

4.5. The said Association is not a legal entity; it is an illegal one and not binding on the plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs approached the trial Court, being aggrieved by the threats held out by the office bearers of the said Association on 06.10.2018 that in the absence of making payments of demands made by them, electricity, water supply, and diesel generator set, etc., would be disconnected.

4.6. It was alleged that the Plaintiffs had paid the electricity bills as and when due on invoices raised by the concerned supplier like MESCOM towards actual consumption made by the Plaintiffs month on month.

4.7. Electricity was disconnected from time to time, and from 06.10.2018 until 09.11.2018 when the suit was filed electricity connection was under disconnection.

5. The Plaintiffs had filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC seeking a mandatory injunction to the defendants, their agents, etc., to restore the electricity supply and grant such other reliefs.

6. The defendants filed their counter-statement to the application filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC. It was contended that

6.1. Plaintiffs had earlier filed a suit in S.C.No.4/2018 on the file of the Civil Judge, Mangaluru, D.K., where identical relief and a mandatory injunction were sought for.

6.2. The mandatory interim injunction sought for in terms of I.A.No.2 filed therein came to be rejected after hearing both sides. Having failed in obtaining an order in S.C.No.4/2018, the present application is not maintainable.

6.3. The plaint in S.C.No.4/2018 h