Karnataka High Court
Devadatta Uppalli @ Devdutt Uppalli vs Sri Manik Prabhu on 20 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043
MFA No. 202197 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202197 OF 2025 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI DEVADATTA UPPALLI @ DEVDUTT UPPALLI
S/O LATE SRI GUNDAPPA UPPALLI,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
R/AT SIDDESHWAR STREET,
OPP. OLD MUNICIPALITY, HUMNABAD,
DISTRICT BIDAR-585 330.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI ABHIJEET S.K.,
SRI SIDDESHWAR PRASAD KABBUR &
SRI A.S. RAWOOR, ADVOCATES)
Digitally
AND:
signed by
SUMITRA SRI MANIK PRABHU
SHERIGAR
S/O LATE SRI GUNDAPPA UPPALLI,
Location:
HIGH COURT AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
OF R/AT NO.23-325, TEACHERS COLONY,
KARNATAKA
KALLUR MAIN ROAD,
NEAR VEERABHADREHSWAR PU COLLEGE,
HUMNABAD, DISTRICT BIDAR-585 330.
...RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT - SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLIII RULE 1 (R) OF
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDRUE, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL
AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24.06.2025
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043
MFA No. 202197 of 2025
HC-KAR
PASSED ON I.A NO.I ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 R/W SECTION
151 AND I.A NO.II FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 4 R/W
SECTION 151 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN OS
NO.09/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A
THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 28.10.2025 AND COMING ON FOR
'PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT', THIS DAY, THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
CAV JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by defendant No.1 against the order dated 24.06.2025 passed on I.A. No.I filed under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC and I.A.No.II filed under Order 39 Rule 4 of CPC, by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Humnabad in O.S.No.09/2025 and the relevant portion of the said order reads as follows:
"Interim Application No.1 is allowed as hereunder:-
An interim injunction has been granted to restrain the defendants from selling the suit property till the disposal of the suit or till 31-10-2025, whichever is earlier.
Interim Application No.2 is dismissed."-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043 MFA No. 202197 of 2025 HC-KAR
2. Brief facts of the case are that, the plaintiff- Manik Prabhu filed O.S.No.09/2025 for partition and separate possession of 1/11th share in the suit schedule property. He also filed I.A.No.1, seeking an interim injunction. An exparte ad-interim injunction was granted in his favour, restraining defendant No.1 from alienating the suit schedule property, on 15.01.2025. Defendant No.1 appeared before the Court and filed I.A.No.2 to vacate the said exparte interim order, on 30.01.2025. He also filed written statement and memo to treat the written statement as objections to I.A. No.1 on 24.02.2025. As the orders are not passed within 30 days, he filed W.P.No.201226/2025 and direction was given by this Court on 09.06.2025 to the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Humnabad to dispose of the matter within 30 days. Accordingly, the Senior Civil Judge allowed I.A.No.1 and restrained defendant No.1 not to alienate the suit property and rejected I.A.No.2 filed for vacating the exparte -4- NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043 MFA No. 202197 of 2025 HC-KAR ad-interim injunction order. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed.
3. Heard the arguments of both sides.
4. On 10.01.2025, Manik Prabhu filed a suit for partition in O.S.No.09/2025, but the property is owned and possessed by third parties i.e., M/s. Sri Sai Chitra Mandira. He stated that, the plaintiff and defendants are the joint owners and possessors of the suit open space bearing T.M.C.No.20-82 corresponding PID No.5-3-13 totally ad-measuring 3893.286021 square meters, situated abutting National Highway bypass road in Humnabad, District Bidar. The plaintiff stated that, defendant No.1 and himself are real brothers. They are the members of Hindu joint family. The said Sai Chitra Mandira was purchased from join family funds. As such, he is entitled for equal share in Sy.No.176, which is converted non-agricultural land fit for layout. He stated that, defendant No.1 is not giving any share to him. The property is an ancestral property, which was nominally -5- NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043 MFA No. 202197 of 2025 HC-KAR standing in the name of defendant No.1. He stated that, the plaintiff, defendant Nos.1, 2, 3, 5, 6 to 8, husband of defendant No.2, father of defendant No.5 and the husband of defendant No.9 formed a partnership firm for establishing Sai Chitra Mandira through registered partnership deed dated 25.09.1986. The firm has acquired non-agricultural converted land in Sy.No.176 measuring 1 acre 1 gunta in a public auction conducted by Khadi and Village Industries Board, Bidar in the name of defendant No.4 - Sidramayya. The Board has executed the registered sale deed in the name of defendant No.4 vide document No.141/85-86 dated 16.12.1985 and all the partners of the firm are having equal share in it. The husband of defendant No.3 expired on 18.01.2001, hence, defendant No.3 became his successor. The father of defendant No.6 expired on 20.11.2013 and defendant No.6 became successor. The husband of defendant No.10 expired on 20.12.2013 and defendant No.10 became successor. Thus, defendant No.3, defendant No.6 and -6- NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043 MFA No. 202197 of 2025 HC-KAR defendant No.10 succeeded 1/11th share of their husband/father. As the theatre was not running properly, they resolved to demolish the entire structure and presently it is an open space. They have also resolved to dissolve the partnership firm and paid all the dues of their creditors. The plaintiff approached the defendants for 1/11th share. Initially, defendants agreed for it, but later, postponing the same on one or other pretext. The plaintiff requested them finally on 04.04.2024. Defendant No.1 filed O.S.No.81/2024. He also filed an application for withdrawal of the suit. Again cause of action arose on 03.12.2024.
5. The Senior Civil Judge, Humnabad, granted an exparte ad-interim order restraining defendant No.1 from alienating the property on 15.01.2025, but there was no compliance of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Later, defendant No.1 filed an application - I.A. No.2 to vacate the exparte ad-interim order and also filed written statement. As the Senior Civil Judge has not -7- NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043 MFA No. 202197 of 2025 HC-KAR disposed of the matter within time, they approached the High Court and got orders and accordingly, the Senior Civil Judge allowed I.A.No.1, but rejected I.A.No.2.
6. On 30.03.2024, the plaintiff/respondent No.1 herein filed an impleading application to implead him as defendant No.10 in O.S.No.81/2024. In view of settlement outside the Court, withdrawal application is filed in O.S.No.81/2024. The respondent herein filed objections on 04.01.2025 and the matter was adjourned to 12.02.2025. Later, suit was disposed of on 11.03.2025 as settled out of the Court.
7. This appeal is filed by defendant No.1 against the order of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Humnabad dated 24.06.2025 contending that, the plaintiff is a stranger to the suit schedule property and he is not a partner in the partnership firm. The revenue documents are in the name of defendant No.4 and thus, requested to set aside the order dated 24.06.2025 passed on I.A. Nos.1 and 2 in O.S. No.09.2025.
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043 MFA No. 202197 of 2025 HC-KAR
8. An application was filed by the plaintiff and defendants on 03.12.2024 stating that, the matter is settled outside the court and plaintiff and defendants agreed to own and enjoy the suit properties and thus, they intended to withdraw the suit in O.S.No.81/2024. It was disposed of on 11.03.2025 as per the daily status. The perusal of the partnership deed shows that, Manik Prabhu is not a party to it. But, the Senior Civil Judge observed that, the plaintiff and defendants are brothers and it was admitted by the first defendant. The suit property was purchased by the first defendant from joint family funds. After filing of the objections, the exparte order passed in I.A.No.1 was not extended and Senior Civil Judge observed that, if the defendant sell the suit property, plaintiff will suffer loss and damage and accordingly, restrained the defendants from selling the suit property till the disposal of the suit or till 31.10.2025, whichever is earlier. The plaintiff is a brother of defendant No.1, but it cannot be said that, he is entitled for 1/11th share in the -9- NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043 MFA No. 202197 of 2025 HC-KAR property. He is a stranger to partnership deed. It is for him to prove that the property is purchased from the joint family funds and the property is an ancestral property. Infact, plaintiff and defendants in O.S.No.81/2024 settled the matter outside the Court and they have withdrawn the suit. Therefore, the order passed by the Senior Civil Judge is without appreciation of proper facts and is liable to be set aside.
9. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 24.06.2025 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Humnabad on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.09/2025 is hereby set aside.
sd/-
(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE LG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4