SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36099

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
G. S. VIJAY KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
G. H. SHARANAPPA – Respondent
MFA 3585/2024



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3585 OF 2024 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

G. S. VIJAY KUMAR, S/O G.H. SHARANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/A SAGANAKAL VILLAGE, BELLARY TALUK AND DISTRICT.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI D PRABHAKAR AND SRI RAGHUNATH C, ADVOCATES)

AND:

1. G. H. SHARANAPPA, S/O. GADDE HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, 2. G S YATHIRAJ, S/O G H SHARANAPPA, Dig itally AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, signed by RAMYA D 3. G S NANDHA RAJ, Location: S/O G H SHARANAPPA, HIGH AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, COURT OF KARNATAKA

4. SMT R DHAKSHAYINI, S/O G H SHARANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, NO.1 TO 4 ARE RESIDING AT:

PLOT NO.202, CREATIVE SURAJ APARTMENT, NEAR VENKATESHWARA TEMPLE, C.P.V. BLOCK, GANGA NAGAR EXTENSION, BENGALURU - 560 032.

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT: NO.112, PRESIDENT LEAON APARTMENT, DUO MARVEL LAYOUT, ANANTHAPURA GATE, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560064.

5. SRI. E. PREMKUMAR S/O. K. SAMBASHIVA RAO, C/O. KHADAR BASHA, MAJOR, HOUSE NO. 28, WARD NO. 35, SIRUGUPPA ROAD, HAVAMBHAVI, BALLARI-583 103.

AND ALSO AT:

FLAT NO. F3, 3RD FLOOR, SRI BALAJI RESIDENCY, BESIDE WOMAN'S COLLEGE, GANDHINAGAR, BALLAI-583 103.

OFFICE AT M/S. SRI RAM CHITS, MANAGER, NEAR DURGAMMA TEMPLE, MOKA ROAD, BALLARI 583 103.

6. SRI. B. B. MALLIKARJUNA GOUDA, S/O. B. ANNAJI GOUDA, MAJOR, R/A PLOT NO. 14A, GURU KRUPA COLONY, NEHRU COLONY, 4TH CROSS, BALLAI 583 103.

7. SRI. B. SHANKAR GOUDA S/O. LATE. BHEEMALINGANA GOUDA, MAJOR, R/A BEVINAHAL VILLAGE, BALLARI TALUK AND DISTRICT - 583 101.

8. SRI. DANIEL RAJKAMAL A, S/O. LATE. A. VICTOR EDWIN, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/A NO.293, 2ND CROSS, 5TH STAGE, BEML LAYOUT, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 098.

9. SRI. SARAVANAN C N S/O. M. NATARAJAN, MAJOR, R/A NO. 23, SHREE RADHA, 1ST 'A' MAIN, SRI. VENKATE GOUDA LAYOUT, PAMPA EXTENSION, KEMPAPURA, HEBBAL, BENGALURU - 560 024.

10. SMT. SAISREE ASHOK, W/O. SRI. K. ASHOK, MAJOR, R/A NO. 686, 8TH 'B' MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, 3RD STAGE, BASAVESHWARA NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 079.

11. SRI. SHASHIBHUSHAN, S/O. RUDRA SHETTY, MAJOR, R/A NO.03/C-3, 6TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, GANGA NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 032.

12. SRI. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, S/O. JAYASHETTY, MAJOR, R/A KARNODY HOUSE VILLY, LILA POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK-574 214. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B G VIJAYAKUMARA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1, SRI KIRAN V RON AND SRI PAVANSIMHA, ADV. FOR C/R7) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15.04.2024 PASSED ON I.A. NO.2 IN O.S.NO. 4590/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE XIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH- 18), REJECTING I.A. NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULE 1 AND 2 READ WITH SECTION 94 AND UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

The appeal is filed by the plaintiff questioning the order dated 15.04.2024 passed by the Court of XIX Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-18), in O.S.No.4590/2019, on I.A.No.2 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 r/w Sections 94 and 151 of CPC, thereby, the application filed for temporary injunction is dismissed. 2. The plaintiff has filed a suit for partition and separate possession by pleading that the plaintiff is the son of defendant No.1 born through his first wife of defendant No.1. The defendant Nos.2 and 3 are the children of defendant No.1 through his second wife, who is defendant No.4. It is pleaded that all the suit schedule properties are joint family properties and thus, he is entitled to share in the properties. Hence, filed the suit for partition.

3. On the other hand, it is the case of the defendants in brief as pleaded in the written statement that item Nos.3 and 4 of the suit schedule properties are only joint family properties and other properties are not joint family properties.

4. Learned counsel for the proposed respondent Nos.6 and 7, who are purchasers of item No.2 p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top