2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 25411
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
UNION BANK OF INDIA – Appellant
Versus
SMT. VIDYA JAYARAM – Respondent
MFA 4966 / 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4966/2023 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
UNION BANK OF INDIA, ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, NO.2/4, RAJA BUILDING, N.R. ROAD, BANGALORE – 560002.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER AND AUTHORISED OFFICER. … APPELLANT (BY SMT. DIVYA PURANDAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. VIDYA JAYARAM, W/O. LATE S.V. JAYARAM, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/AT NO.14/3, 2ND FLOOR, 10TH ‘C’ MAIN, 1ST BLOCK JAYANAGAR, SIDDAPUR, BENGALURU-560 011.
2. M/S. CURIE IMAGING AND DIAGNOSTICS, NO.20/7, 2ND MAIN ROAD, SHESHADRIPURAM, BEHIND APOLLO HOSPITAL BENGALURU.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS SHWETHA SHARMA AND DEEPAK THOUSAOJAM.
3. SHWETHA SHARMA, W/O DEEPAK SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO.A0003, RAJAPRAKRUTHI APARTMENT, 4TH CROSS, 1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGLAURU-560 011.
4. DEEPAK THOUNAOJAM, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, NO.128, GROUND FLOOR, 2ND CROSS, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095.
5. DEEPAK SHARMA, AGED MAJOR, RESIDING AT FLAT NO.A0003, RAJAPRAKRUTHI APARTMENT, 4TH CROSS, 1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGLAURU-560 011.
6. SHOBHA, W/O SACHINDRA, AGED 40 YEARS, 14/3, 1ST FLOOR, 10TH C MAIN, 1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU – 560011. 7. N RAMA MURTHY, S/O NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, FLAT NO.402M, 4TH FLOOR, KT APARTMENTS-4, NO.46, 13TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU – 560003.
8. THE BANK MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, SRI GURURAYA MANSION, No.759, 8TH MAIN, JP NAGAR 3RD PHASE, BENGALURU – 560 078.
9. GENERAL MANAGER/REGIONAL MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, No.10/A, CHANDRA KIRAN, 1ST FLOOR, OPPOSITE CUBBON PARK POLICE STATION, BENGALURU – 560 001.
10. SMT. VISWALATHA, THE BANK MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, SRI GURURAYA MANSION, NO.759, 8TH MAIN, J P NAGAR, 3RD PHASE, BENGALURU- 560078.
11. SRI RAJESH, THE BANK MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, SRI GURURAYA MANSION, NO.759, 8TH MAIN, J P NAGAR, 3RD PHASE, BENGALURU – 560078.
12. SHYLAJA R, AGED MAJOR, NO.67, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, PHASE-1, 5TH STAGE, BEML LAYOUT, RR NAGAR, BANGALORE 560098.
13. SHRI S.J. SANDEEP, S/O LATE S.V. JAYARAM, AGED 52 YEARS, R/AT No.14/3, 1ST FLOOR, 10TH ‘C’ MAIN, 1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, SIDDAPUR, BENGALURU -560 011.
14. SHRI S.J. SACHINDRA, S/O LATE S.V. JAYARAM, AGED 50 YEARS, R/AT No.14/3, 1ST FLOOR, 10TH ‘C’ MAIN, 1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, SIDDAPUR, BENGALURU -560 011. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIVEK S. REDDY, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI V. MUNIRAJ, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;
SRI S. NAGARAJA, ADVOCATE FOR R13 AND R14;
NOTICE TO R2 TO R12 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 20.12.2024)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.04.2023 PASSED ON I.A.NOS I AND II IN OS.NO.1843/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE XII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CCH-27, BENGALURU, ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.1 AND 2 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 20.12.2024, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CAV JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned counsel for the caveator/respondent No.1 and the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.13 and 14.
2. This appeal is filed challenging the order dated
19.04.2023 passed on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.1843/2023 allowing the applications granting the relief of temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff/respondent No.1.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff in a suit filed for the relief of declaration and injunction it is contended that the plaintiff is the sole, absolute owner and in actual possession of the property, which is morefully described in the schedule. It is contended that originally late Veerappa and his children partitioned the properties vide partition deed dated 05.02.1974 and the suit schedule property was allotted to the share of the plaintiff’s husband S.V.Jayaram. The said S.V.Jayaram died on 15.02.2014 and after the death of the plaintiff’s husband, all the revenue rec