Karnataka High Court
Sri. Ikram Pasha vs Smt. Nirmala. K on 9 June, 2022
Bench: B.M.Shyam Prasad
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5782/2018
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NOS.5783/2018,
5784/2018, 5785/2018 (CPC)
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5782/2018
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. IKRAM PASHA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
S/O. MOHAMMED AKBAR,
2. SMT. UMM E SALMA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
W/O. IKRAM PASHA,
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.46,
4TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN,
NTI LAYOUT, SANJAY NAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 094.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.S.HARISH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. NIRMALA. K
W/O. SRI. GANGADHARA POOJARI,
-2-
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/O. NO. 6, "AISHWARYA",
8TH MAIN, 8TH CROSS,
BRINDAVAN NAGAR, MATHIKERE,
BENGALURU-560 054.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANTOSH S. GOGI, ADVOCATE)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
ORDER MFA FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.09.2017 ON I.A.NOS.1
AND 2 IN O.S.NO.5470/2017, BETWEEN NIRMALA K VS.
IKRAM PASHA AND OTHERS BY THE HONBLE III ADDITIONAL
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH
25).
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5783/2018
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. IKRAM PASHA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
S/O. MOHAMMED AKBAR,
2. SMT. UMM E SALMA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
W/O. IKRAM PASHA,
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.46,
4TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN,
NTI LAYOUT, SANJAY NAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 094.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.S.HARISH, ADVOCATE)
-3-
AND:
SMT. B.S.BHAGYALAKSHMI
W/O. SRI. NAGANNA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/O. NO.114, 3RD CROSS
P&T COLONY, 2ND BLOCK
R.T.NAGAR
BENGALURU-560 032
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANTOSH S. GOGI, ADVOCATE)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
ORDER MFA FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.09.2017 ON I.A.NOS.1
AND 2 IN O.S.NO.5473/2017, BETWEEN B.S.BHAGYALAKSHMI
VS. IKRAM PASHA AND OTHERS BY THE HONBLE III
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU
CITY (CCH 25).
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5784/2018
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. IKRAM PASHA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
S/O. MOHAMMED AKBAR,
2. SMT. UMM E SALMA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
W/O. IKRAM PASHA,
-4-
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.46,
4TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN,
NTI LAYOUT, SANJAY NAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 094.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.S.HARISH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. M.K.NALINI
W/O. SRI. K.N.KESHAV NARAYANA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
R/O. NO.26, 19TH MAIN ROAD
M.C.LAYOUT
VIJAYANAGAR, BINNYPET
BENGALURU-560 040
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANTOSH S. GOGI, ADVOCATE)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
ORDER MFA FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.09.2017 ON I.A.NOS.1
AND 2 IN O.S.NO.5474/2017, BETWEEN M.K.NALINI VS.
IKRAM PASHA AND OTHERS BY THE HONBLE III ADDITIONAL
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH
25).
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5785/2018
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. IKRAM PASHA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
S/O. MOHAMMED AKBAR,
-5-
2. SMT. UMM E SALMA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
W/O. IKRAM PASHA,
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.46,
4TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN,
NTI LAYOUT, SANJAY NAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 094.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K.S.HARISH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT B.N.SAVITHA
W/O. SRI. D.NANJESH
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/O. NO.528, 3RD BLOCK
8TH MAIN, HMT LAYOUT
VIDYARANYAPURA
BENGALURU
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANTOSH S. GOGI, ADVOCATE)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
ORDER MFA FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.09.2017 ON I.A.NOS.1
AND 2 IN O.S.NO.5476/2017, BETWEEN B.N.SAVITHA K VS.
IKRAM PASHA AND OTHERS BY THE HONBLE III ADDITIONAL
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH
25).
THESE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS COMING ON
FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
-6-
JUDGMENT
These appeals are by the common defendants in
O.S.Nos.5470/2017, 5473/2017, 5474/2017 and
5476/2017 on the file of the III Additional City Civil and
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (for short, 'the civil Court').
The civil Court by the impugned common order dated
13.09.2017 has allowed similar application by the
corresponding plaintiffs making absolute the ex parte order
of temporary injunction granted in each of the suits and
consequentially, the appellants - defendants are restrained
from interfering with respective possession of those sites
that are described individually in each of the plaint.
2. The appellants contend that they have acquired
absolute title to an extent of 8 guntas in Sy.Nos.8/9A and
8/9B of Kodigehalli Kothihosahalli Village,
Byatarayanapura, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk
(the subject property) from one Smt. Snehalatha, who in
turn has acquired title from the undisputed owner of the
larger extent of land in these survey numbers from
Sri. Kuribachappa and his family. Though a larger extent
of land in the aforesaid survey number is acquired for the
benefit of NTI House Building Co-operative Society, the
subject property purchased by the appellants is not part of
the acquisition.
3. The appellants further contend their case that
the subject property is not acquired is established by the
fact that the award in the acquisition proceedings is only
for 3 acres 9 guntas and not 3 acres 17 guntas, the larger
extent of the land. They also rely upon the two sanctions
granted by the Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA) to
contend that 8 guntas is not part of the acquisition
proceedings or the subsequent development by the Society.
4. On the other hand, the corresponding
respondents assert that they have been allotted the
respective sites by the Society and they have the benefit of
the lease deeds executed by the Society. They also assert
that they have the benefit of khatha for the sites issued by
the BDA and the subsequent revenue entries with the legal
authority.
5. It is obvious from the rival submissions that the
dispute between the parties relate to the identity of the
property as asserted respectively. The civil Court has
decided the respective applications based on the earlier
dispute1 inter se the Society and the undisputed prior
owner, Sri. Kuribachappa, and the civil Court has opined
that this decision, though without contest, must have
precedence. The civil Court has also observed that the
subsequent order of status quo in the other proceedings2
commenced by the appellants cannot inure to their
advantage in view of the prior decree in the year 2012.
6. It is ascertained that the suit in
O.S.No.25093/2011 is presently decided on merits by the
judgment dated 16.12.2017. The civil Court has decreed
this suit primarily because the Society may not have any
objection for grant of injunction insofar as the subject
property which measures 6 guntas. In fact, the Society did
not dispute that this 8 guntas is not part of the acquisition.
This could be a vindication of the appellants' right in the
subject property. But, the respondents are clai ming rights
to the sites in those extents that are part of the acquisition
in favour of the Society. The identity of the respective
properties must necessarily be examined for the purposes
of final adjudication.
- 10 -
7. It is now stated that the respective respondents
have almost completed their evidence with only one of the
respondents - plaintiffs to be cross examined on behalf of
the appellants. It is asserted on behalf of the appellants
that none of the plaintiffs - respondents have started
construction and the land is open even as of today. This
Court, in the circumstances of the case, is not persuaded to
opine that the exercise of discretion by the civil Court is
either perverse or irregular. Therefore, the appeals stand
disposed of with the observation that all questions shall be
decided by the civil Court based on the evidence on record
independent of any observation in the impugned orders.
SD/-
JUDGE
RB
