1. C. R. P. No. 577/1965 is directed against the order of the Principal Munsiff, Gulbarga, in case No. 237/2 of 1960 ordering that the respondent herein is entitled to restoration of possession of the suit lands. C. R. P. No. 583/1965 is directed against the order passed by the Civil Judge. Gulbarga, in Appeal No. 158/5 of 1964, reversing the order dated 25-8-1964 on the file of the Principal Munsiff, Gulbarga.

2. In C. R. P 577/1965 the petitioner is the plaintiff and the respondents are the defendants. In C. R. P. 583/1965 petitioners are defendants 2 and 4 and respondent 1 is the plaintiff and respondents 2 and 3 are defendants 1 and 3.

3. In both the C. R. Ps. common questions of fact and law arise out of the same suit pending before the Principal Munsiff, Gulbarga. Hence, they are heard and disposed of together.

4. Previous to the suit in question, the suit properties were subject matter of proceedings under S.145 Cr. P.C. In which defendants' possession was declared. Revisions filed before the Dist. Magistrate and also before the High Court were missed in the year 1959. In the meanwhile, the plaintiff filed a suit in C. S. 82/1/53-54 for declaration of his adoption and title to the suit schedule properties against tin defendants. On 1-6-1953, an interim injunction was issued against the defendants. The suit was dismissed for default and was restored on 26-9-1953. Again, the suit was dismissed for default on 19-7-1955. The restoration application filed on 17-8-1955 was also dismissed for default on 19-10-1955. The case came up in revision to the High Court and was allowed on 15-11-1960 and the case was remanded. On 20-12-1960, the case was again dismissed for default. On 21-12-1960 restoration application was filed. During that period, an application under O.39, Rr. 1 and 2 was rejected on 25-1-1961 on the ground that the court had no inherent powers to grant the relief prayed for.
Against that order, C. R. P. No. 232/61 was filed in which an order of temporary injunction was obtained. In the said revision petition, I. A. No. II was filed for vacation of the interim order obtained. The Court passed an order on 29-3-1961 directing the 2nd defendant to take possession of the property and to withdraw the amount in deposit after giving security to the satisfaction of the Sub-Judge, Gulbarga after dissolving the interim injunction. Later on, the C. R. P. 232/61 was disposed of by this court on 19-11-1962. The Revision Petition was allowed and the trial court was directed to consider whether the temporary injunction order passed by it should or should not be vacated. In the meanwhile, the restoration application dated 21-12-1960 filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by the trial court on 25-8-1964 and on appeal to the Civil Judge, Gulbarga, it was allowed on 23-4-1965. C. R. Ps. 577/65 and 583/65 on the file of this Court are directed against these orders.

5. In pursuance of the order passed by this Court on I. A. No. II on 29-3-1961 in C. R. P. No. 232/61, the learned Principal Munsiff, Gulbarga, has heard both the parties on 15-1-1965 and passed an order directing the 2nd defendant to furnish security to the extent of Rs. 16.560.58 P. The 2nd defendant filed a security bond and the plaintiff objected to the security. Thereafter, the 2nd defendant filed an application on 2-6-1965 stating that he did not want to withdraw the amount in deposit and requested the court to restore possession of the suit lands without calling upon him to furnish any security. The plaintiff also filed an application stating that M. A. No. 158/5/1964 against the order of the Munsiff dated 25-8-1964 in Miscellaneous No 237/2/60 was set aside and O. S. No. 83/1 of 1963-64 was restored to file by the Civil Judge, Gulbarga and further he claimed that the restoration of the suit revives the ancillary orders which were passed in the original suit and accordingly the interim injunction passed by the then Subordinate Judge should be deemed to have been restored