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

CHELUVARAJU – Appellant
Versus
SOMASHEKAR GOWDA – Respondent
SLP(C) No.-007251-007254 / 2023 21-04-2023



Advocates:
ANURADHA MUTATKAR

1

ITEM NO.15 COURT NO.16 SECTION IV-A

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7251-7254/2023

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02-01-2023

in MFA No. 5935/2021 02-01-2023 in MFA No. 5931/2021 02-01-2023 in

MFA No. 5940/2021 02-01-2023 in MFA No. 5933/2021 passed by the

High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru)

CHELUVARAJU & ORS. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

SOMASHEKAR GOWDA & ORS. Respondent(s)

(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.71964/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. )

Date : 21-04-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

For Petitioner(s) Mr. S.N. BhaT, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Tarun Kr. Thakur, Adv.

Mr. D. Srinivasa Nayak, Adv.

Ms. Parvati Bhat, Adv.

Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the

petitioners.

The petitioners are the original defendant nos. 4, 6 and

7 who applied for temporary injunction in a suit for

protecting their possession against the plaintiffs.

The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners

Digitally signed by

Indu Marwah

Date: 2023.04.21

17:22:05 IST

Reason:

Signature Not Verified

2

pointed out that an ex-parte injunction was granted by the

Trial Court in favour of the plaintiffs which has now been

vacated.

A perusal of the application for injunction made by the

present petitioners shows that they apprehended that they will

be dispossessed on the basis of the order of temporary

injunction granted in favour of the plaintiffs. Now the order

of temporary injunction granted in favour of the plaintiffs

has been vacated.

Apart from the aforesaid facts, the present petitioners

could not have applied for temporary injunctions as defendants

seeking a relief under Rule 1(c) of Order XXXIX of the Code of

Civil Procedure, 1908.

We find that no case for interference is made out. The

Special Leave Petitions are accordingly dismissed.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(INDU MARWAH) (AVGV RAMU)

COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER(NSH)

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