Back
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SHRI M SATISH – Appellant
Versus
SMT K N SAROJA – Respondent
MFA/1631/2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
M.F.A.NO.1631 OF 2021 (CPC)
BETWEEN
SHRI. M. SATISH,
S/O. MUNIRAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.08, SWAROOPANILAYA,
5TH MAIN, 50 FEET, CENTRAL EXCISE LAYOUT,
BHOOPASANDRA, BANGALORE NORTH,
R.M.V. EXTENSION II STAGE,
BENGALURU – 560 094.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. CHETHAN B., FOR IRFANA NAZEER, ADVOCATE)
AND
1.
SMT. K.N. SAROJA,
W/O. K. NAGARAJ,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 'KAILASA' WATER
TANK ROAD, KAVERI LAYOUT,
HEBBAL DASARAHALLI,
BENGALURU – 560 024.
2.
MRS. PREMA SUNIL PARABHA,
W/O. MR. SUNIL VISHRAM PARABHA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.E-201, AKSHARDHAM,
CHS LTD., P.G.ROAD,
OPP. TOYOTA SHOWROOM,
MALAD WEST DELY,
MUMBAI – 400 064.
MAHARASHTRA STATE.
2
3.
MS. SUSHILAVATHY J. GEORGE,
DAUGHTER OF LATE E. JOSEPH GEORGE,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
RESIDING AT ROOM NO.107,
DHEERAJ NARMADA BUILDING NO.19,
CHINCHOLI BUNDER ROAD,
NEAR BHUJALE TLAV,
CHINCHOLI BUNDER, RAM NAGAR,
MALAD WEST DELY,
MUMBAI – 400 064.
MAHARASHTRA STATE.
4.
MRS. SHANTHAMMA,
W/O. LATE CHIKKAVENKATEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
RESIDING AT BARKATHARAHALLI VILLAGE,
CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA – 562 102.
5.
MS. PUSHPA @ PUSHPA V.,
D/O. LATE CHIKKAVENKATEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.67, ASHOKA NAGAR,
1ST CROSS, 1ST WARD, VIJAYAPURA,
BENGALURU RURAL,
BENGALURU – 562 135.
6.
MS. SHOBHA,
D/O. LATE CHIKKAVENKATEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.2,
BHAKATARAHALLI 2ND BLOCK,
SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA – 562 102.
7.
MR. B.V. SURENDRA,
S/O. LATE CHIKKAVENKATEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.66,
BHAKATARAHALLI VILLAGE,
JANGAMAKOTE HOBLI,
SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT,
3
KARNATAKA – 562 102.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N. THIMMEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;
NOTICE TO R2-R7 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD 14/07/2021)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC,
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2021 PASSED ON IA NO.10 IN
O.S.NO.10045/2014, ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-25), ALLOWING
THE IA NO.10 FILED U/O 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal by defendant No.7 in O.S.No.10045/2014
on the file of the III Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City, is directed against the impugned order dated
15.02.2021 on I.A.No.10 passed by the trial Court whereby
I.A.No.10 filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2
CPC for temporary injunction was allowed.
2.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned counsel for the Caveator/respondent No.1 and also
perused the material on record.
4
3.
Though several contentions are urged by both
sides in support of their respective claims, having regard to
the nature of the suit filed by the respondent No.1 / plaintiff
and the reliefs sought for by her as well as the nature and
character of the suit schedule property as described in the
schedule to the plaint, without expressing any opinion on the
merits / de-merits of the rival contentions, it would be just and
appropriate to dispose of this appeal by making necessary
interim arrangements till disposal of the suit by the trial Court,
within a stipulated time frame.
4.
In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i)
Appeal is hereby disposed of.
(ii) The impugned order dated 15.02.2021
passed in O.S.No.10045/2014 by the III Addl. City
Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City is hereby
modified
subject
to
the
following
interim
5
arrangements, which shall remain in force during
pendency of the suit:
(a)
Appellant shall not alienate,
encumber or create third party rights
