The scope for interference by the appellate court in discretionary orders is limited to cases of clear error or unjustifiable decisions, emphasizing the trial court's reasoned approach in assessing injunction requests.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 202808 OF 2023 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

SHABBIR MIYAN S/O ABDUL RAZAQ, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: HUMNABAD PROPER, TQ: & DIST: BIDAR – 585 401.

THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SHAKEEL AHMED S/O.MD.ABDUL KHAYUM, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE AND BUSINESS, R/O: BIBI GALLI, HUMNABAD, TQ: HUMNABAD, DIST: BIDAR.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI K.M.GHATE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. NAGAMMA W/O LATE VISHNUREDDY, AGE ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: VILLAGE DHUMMANSUR TQ: HUMNABAD, DIST: BIDAR – 585 330.

2. PRABHU REDDY S/O LATE VISHNU REDDY, AGE ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: VILLAGE DHUMMANSUR, TQ: HUMNABAD, DIST: BIDAR – 585 330.

3. SAI REDDY S/O LATE VISHNU REDDY, AGE ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: VILLAGE DHUMMANSUR, TQ: HUMNABAD, DIST: BIDAR – 585 330.

4. RAJ REDDY S/O LATE MANIK REDDY, AGE ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE AND SERVICE, R/O: VILLAGE DHUMMANSUR, TQ: HUMNABAD, DIST: BIDAR – 585 330. 5. MIQZA IMRAN BAIG S/O MIRZA WAHED BAIG, AGE ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: VILLAGE GADWANTI, TQ: HUMNABAD, DIST: BIDAR – 585 330.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SACHIN M. MAHAJAN, ADVOCATE)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLIII RULE 1 (R) OF Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 , PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HUMNABAD IN OS NO.5/2023 DATED 14.06.2023, DISMISSING I.A NO.I WITH COST OF RS.1000/-. THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW IA UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC AND PLEASE TO ISSUE TEMPORARY INJUNCTION RESTRAINING THE RESPONDENT DEFENDANTS NO. 4 AND 5 FROM TRYING TO ALIENATE, CREATE THIRD PARTY RIGHTS IN RESPECT OF SUIT PROPERTIES AS SHOWN IN THE SKETCH MAP OF THE PLAINT, TILL FINAL DISPOSAL OF THE SUIT, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.

THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL JUDGMENT Challenging order dated 14.06.2023 passed by Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Humnabad in OS no.5/2023 on IA no.I, this appeal is filed.

2. Sri K.M.Ghate, learned counsel submitted this was plaintiff’s appeal against order dismissing I.As no.I and II filed by plaintiff under order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). It was submitted, OS no.5/2023 was filed against respondents herein seeking for declaration and perpetual injunction etc. In said suit, I.A.no.I was filed for temporary injunction restraining defendants no.4 and 5 from alienating and creating third party rights over suit properties during pendency of suit. It was submitted, in affidavit filed in support of application, it was stated plaintiff had purchased 09 Acre 11 guntas in Sy.no.10/2 of Manik Nagar village under registered sale-deed dated 11.03.1977 from Veeranna Manikappa Pujari. Said Veeranna had purchased it from Manik Reddy under registered sale-deed dated 22.04.1974. It was stated Manik Reddy was father-in-law, grand-father and father of defendants no.1 to 4 respectively. It was further stated, as there was error in mentioning survey number of land, said mistake was got corrected by decree dated 21.03.2006 in OS no.154/1994. In pursuance of same, plaintiff applied for mutations, which were effected. Thereafter plaintiff had filed application for survey, demarcation and fixation of boundaries. Said demarcation found plaintiff in possession of 08 Acre 21 guntas. Out of same, extent of 05 Acres 23 guntas under different sale-deeds and retained 02 Acres 15 guntas. He got converted said land for non-agricultural purposes.

3. But, during year 2018-19, he noticed on basis of created entries in record of rights, defendants no.4 and 5 begu