Karnataka High Court
Sri Doddammachikkamma vs Sri. Shivanna Gowda on 10 April, 2023
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
MFA No. 7079 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7079 OF 2022 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI DODDAMMACHIKKAMMA
TEMPLE CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE
SOORANAHALLI
REPRESENTED BY
1. SHEKAR
S/O SIDDE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/O BYRAPURA VILLAGE
MUGULAVALLI POST
AMBLE HOBLI,
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 101
Digitally signed 2. MANJU
by VANDANA S S/O RAME GOWD A
Location: High AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
Court of R/O BYRAPURA VILLAGE
Karnataka MUGULAVALLI POST
AMBLE HOBLI,
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 101
3. VENKATESH
S/O NINGE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/O GOKUL FARM
MUGULAVALLI POST
AMBLE HOBI,
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 101
-2-
MFA No. 7079 of 2022
4. JANARDHAN
S/O NARAYANASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
R/O SOORANAHALLI VILLAGE
MUGULAVALLI POST
AMBLE HOBI,
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 101
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE., ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI. SHIVANNA GOWDA
S/O LATE MALLE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
R/O SOORANAHALLI VILLAGE
MUGULAVALLI POST
AMBLE HOBI,
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 101
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. MADHUKESHWARA R.P., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI SACHIN B S., ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/O 43 RULE 1(r) R/W SECTION 151 OF
CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.02.2021 PASSED ON
I.A.NO.3 IN OS.NO.98/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND CJM, CHIKKAMAGALURU, ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.3
FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
MFA No. 7079 of 2022
JUDGMENT
This appeal by the appellants-defendants in O.S.No.98/2020
is directed against the impugned order dated 12.02.2021 passed
by the Court of Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Chikkamagaluru,
whereby the application, I.A.No.III filed by the respondent-plaintiff
under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC for temporary injunction
against the appellants was allowed by the trial Court.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
respondent and perused the material on record.
3. The material on record discloses that there are several
contentious issues and disputed questions of law and fact that
arises for consideration in the suit before the trial Court which
would necessarily would have to be decided only after a full fledged
trial.
4. It is also relevant to state that though the impugned
order was passed as long back as on 12.02.2021, the appellants
did not have the benefit of any interim order in the present appeal.
5. Under these circumstances, though several
contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their
MFA No. 7079 of 2022
respective claims, without expressing any opinion on the
merits/demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and
appropriate to dispose of this appeal by modifying the impugned
order and by directing the trial Court to dispose of the suit in
O.S.No.98/2020 as expeditiously as possible and preferably, within
a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order
and without being influenced by the findings and observations
recorded in the impugned order.
6. It is however directed that, without prejudice to the
rights and contentions of the parties and by way of temporary
interim arrangement, the appellants-defendants would be entitled
to use/utilise the plaint 'B' schedule property for the limited purpose
of performing Pooja/Jatra in relation to the subject Temple, till
disposal of the suit by the trial Court.
With these observations and directions, the appeal is
disposed off.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VGR
