Sri M Hidayathulla vs Sri S K Nagaraja
2022 Latest Caselaw 4731 Kant

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 14 T H DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                       BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

             MFA NO.6852 OF 2019(CPC)

BETWEEN:

1.   Sri M. Hidayathulla
     Aged about 46 years
     S/o Mr. A.R.Mohammed Ali
     R/o No.14, Khazi Street
     Conservancy Road
     M.D.Block, Basavanag udi
     Bang alore - 560 004.

2.   Mrs. Hajira Begum
     W/o Sri M.Hid ayathulla
     Aged about 37 years
     R/o No.14, Khazi Street
     Conservancy Road
     M.D.Block, Basavanag udi
     Bang alore - 560 004.
                                         ...Appellants

(By Sri Mohd. Usman Shaikh, Advocate)

AND:

1.   Sri. S.K. Nag araja
     Aged about 49 years
     S/o Late Krishnamurthy S
     R/at Tayalur Village
     Kasab a Hobli
     Mulab ag ilu Taluk
     Kolar District - 563 136
                          :: 2 ::


2.   Sri Amb rish S.K
     Aged about 46 years
     S/o Late Krishnamurthy S
     R/at Tayalur Village
     Kasab a Hobli
     Mulab ag ilu Taluk
     Kolar District - 563 136

3.   Sri Thejomurthy S.K
     Aged about 44 years
     S/o Late Krishnamurthy S
     R/at Tayalur Village
     Kasab a Hobli
     Mulab ag ilu Taluk
     Kolar District - 563 136

4.   Mr. Krishnapp a
     Aged about 53 years
     S/o Sri Muniswamapp a
     R/at No.126
     Star Muniswamy Layout
     J.P.Nag ar, V-Phase
     Bang alore - 560 078

5.   Sri Nand akumar
     S/o Chikanna
     Aged about 65 years
     R/at Velliamma Temple Street
     Vannavarp et
     Beng aluru - 560 042

6.   Mr. Nag araju Red dy
     Aged about 58 years
     S/o Narayana Reddy
     R/o No.14, Near Mylasandra
     Begur Hob li, Beg ur Post
     Bang alore - 560 0

7.   M/s. Nalig e Production(R)
     Having its registered office
     At No.326, 27 t h Main,
     1 s t Floor, 21 s t Cross,
                          :: 3 ::


     HSR Layout, Sector-II
     Bang alore - 560 012
     Represented by its
     Managing Partner
     Mr. Sushanth Nalige S.

8.   The Manag er
     Bank of Barod a
     Jayanag ar Branch
     P.B. No.1120, 9 t h main
     3 r d Block, Jayanagara
     Beng aluru - 560 011.
                                          ...Respondents

(By Sri B.C. Srirama Reddy, Advocate
     for R-1 to R-3; notice to R-4 to R-6
     is dispensed with vide order dated
     18.02.2022; notice to R-8 is held
     sufficient vid e order d ated 18.02.2022;
    Sri K. Shridhara, Advocate for R-7)

      This MFA is filed und er Order XLIII Rule 1(R) of
the Cod e of Civil Procedure, 1908 (as amend ed) by
Act 22 of 2002 praying to set aside the impugned
order dated 05.08.2019 p assed by LXIV Addl. City
Civil and Sessions Judge at Bang alore city (CCH-65) in
O.S.No.1736/2017 on I.A.No.1 and 3 filed under Ord er
XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC.

     This MFA coming on for admission this d ay, the
Court delivered the following:

                      JUDGMENT

Heard Sri Mohd. Usman Shaikh, learned

counsel for the appellants and Sri B.C.Srirama

Reddy, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3.

:: 4 ::

2. The appellants are defendants 5 and 6 in

O.S.No.1736/2017 filed by the respondents 1 to 3

herein for declaration and permanent injunction.

3. On 05.08.2019, the Trial Court disposed

of two applications as per IA No.1 and 3 filed by

the plaintiffs. IA No.1 was filed under Order

XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC to restrain defendants 3

to 7 or anybody claiming under them from

alienating or creating any charges in respect of or

over the suit property. IA No.3 was filed by the

plaintiffs to restrain defendants 5 and 6 from

interfering with their possession of the suit

property. By passing the impugned order, both

applications were allowed and hence the appellants

are before this Court.

4. Sri Mohd. Usman Shaikh, learned counsel

for the appellants submits that the appellants

herein had also filed a suit, O.S.No.4750/2018 in

the City Civil Court, Bengaluru for setting aside :: 5 ::

the judgment and decree passed in

O.S.No.8015/2001. The subject matter in the suit

filed by the appellants is the same as the subject

matter in O.S.No.1736/2017.

5. It is submitted by Sri Srirama Reddy,

learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3 that in

O.S.No.1736/2017, recording of evidence has

commenced and that the plaintiff has been partly

cross examined.

6. It is submitted by Sri Mohd. Usman

Shaikh, that after the Trial Court passed the order

on IA Nos.1 and 3, the appellants stopped

construction and that they will not undertake

further construction till disposal of the suit. His

only request is that the suit filed by the appellants

i.e., O.S.No.4750/2018 should be decided along

with O.S.No.1736/2017.

7. In this view, without touching the merits

of the appeal, the parties are directed to maintain :: 6 ::

the same status of the property as it stood on the

date when the order on IA Nos.1 and 3 was

passed. If an application under Section 5(2) of

the Bengaluru City Civil Court Act is made for

clubbing of both suits for adjudication by the same

Court, the same may be considered and that the

Trial Court shall dispose of the two suits together.

With these observations, appeal stands disposed

of.

IA No.1/2019 does not survive for

consideration. It stands disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Kmv/-