Karnataka High Court
Smt. Rajamma vs Maregowda on 17 August, 2023
Bench: S.G.Pandit
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:29180
WP No. 17411 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 17411 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. RAJAMMA
W/O LATE NANJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MUDDAHANUMANAPALAY VILLAGE,
R BYADARAHALLI DHAKALE,
ANKANAHALLI POST,
HULIYURUDURGA HOBLI,
KINIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT 572101.
2. MANJUNATHA N
S/O SRI NANJAPPA AND SMT RAJAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
RESIDING AT K G DEVAPATNA (HANGARAHALLI)
Digitally VILLAGE,
signed by CHOWDANAKUPPE POST,
PRAMILA G V
HULIYURUDURGA HOBLI,
Location:
HIGH COURT KINIGAL TALUK,
OF TUMAKURU DISTRICT 572101
KARNATAKA
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR S.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MAREGOWDA
S/O SRI NANJAPPA AND SAROJAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MUDDAHANUMANAPALAY VILLAGE,
R BYADARAHALLI DHAKALE,
ANKANAHALLI POST,
HULIYURUDURGA HOBLI,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:29180
WP No. 17411 of 2023
KINIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT 572101
2. SMT M N PREMA
W/O SRI LATE M V CHALUVAIAH,
D/O SRI NANAJAPPA AND SMT SAROJAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 3, 2ND MAIN, 5TH CROSS,
MUNESHWARA LAYOUT,
NEAR KTG SCHOOL,
(BALAJI APARTMENTS)
HEGGANAHALLI,
BENGALURU 560091
3. SMT JAYAMMA
W/O LATE SRI NANJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MUDDAHANUMANAPALAY VILLAGE,
R BYADARAHALLI DHAKALE,
ANKANAHALLI POST,
HULIYURUDURGA HOBLI,
KINIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT 572101
4. KUM LAKSHMI
D/O SRI PRAKASH,
AND SMT SAROJAMMA,
GRAND DAUGHTER OF SRI NANJAPPA
AND SMT JAYAMMA
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MUDDAHANUMANAPALAY VILLAGE,
R BYADARAHALLI DHAKALE,
ANKANAHALLI POST,
HULIYURUDURGA HOBLI,
KINIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT 572101
SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER GRAND
MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN,
SMT JAYAMMA
W/O LATE SRI NANAJAPPA
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:29180
WP No. 17411 of 2023
5. SMT SHARADAMMA
W/O SRI MAREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MUDDAHANUMANAPALAY VILLAGE,
R BYADARAHALLI DHAKALE,
ANKANAHALLI POST,
HULIYURUDURGA HOBLI,
KINIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT 572101
...RESPONDENTS
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO-CALL FOR THE
RECORDS OF O.S.NO.153/2023, IN THE COURT OF THE
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC TUMAKURU. SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DTD JULY 18, 2023, ON IA NO.3 IN O.S.NO.153/223,
IN THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
TUMAKURU, UNDER ANNEXURE-E. ALLOW IN JULY 18, 2023,
ON IA NO. 3 IN OS. NO. 153/2023, IN THE COURT OF THE
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC TUMAKURU, UNDER
ANNEXURE-D, FILED BY THE PETITIONER. GRANT AN INTERIM
ORDER OF TEMPORARY INJUNCTION RESTRAINING THE
RESPONDENTS, OR ANY OF THEM, HIS/HER/THEIR ISSUE
GRANT OR ANY PERSONS CLAIMING UNDER OR THROUGH,
HIS/HER/THEM FROM CUTTING THE STANDING TREES,
INCLUDING PLUCKING THE NUTS/FRUITS AND DISPOSING ANY
PART THEREOF, DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE PLAINT
SCHEDULE PROPERTIESPOST.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARU
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:29180
WP No. 17411 of 2023
ORDER
Petitioners/Plaintiffs in OS.No.153/2023 on the file
of Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Kunigal,
Tumakuru district are before this Court challenging the
order dated 18.07.2023 passed on IA.No.3 by which the
trial Court observed that it is necessary to here other side
before passing any order on IA.No.3 filed under Order 39
Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC.
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and
perused the writ petition papers.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would
submit that the petitioners/plaintiffs in O.S.No.153/2022
prayed for Judgment and decree of partition and also for
mesne profits in the suit. The petitioners also filed three
applications. IA.No.2 under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read
with Section 151 of CPC to restrain the defendants/ their
henchman from alienating or disposing the application suit
schedule property and the said IA.No.2 was allowed and
NC: 2023:KHC:29180
WP No. 17411 of 2023
the defendants were restrained from selling, alienating or
disposing of the suit schedule property.
4. IA.No.3 was also filed under Order 39 Rules 1
and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC with a prayer to
restrain the defendants from cutting the standing trees
including plucking the nuts/fruits and disposing of any part
thereof.
5. The trial Court on hearing the learned counsel
for the plaintiffs was of the opinion that, before passing
any order on IA.No.3 it would be necessary to here other
side. On going through the material on records, I don't see
any error in the opinion of the trial Court to hear other
side before passing any order on IA.No.3.
6. Learned counsel for petitioners/plaintiffs would
submit that, the petitioners/plaintiffs are wife and son of
one Sri. Nanjappa and Sri. Nanjappa had two wives by
name Smt. Rajamma i.e., first plaintiff and Smt.
Sarojamma. First plaintiff claims that she is the second
NC: 2023:KHC:29180
WP No. 17411 of 2023
wife. The plaintiffs have to establish their entitlement to
the suit scheduled property.
7. The trial Court has rightly observed that it
would be necessary to hear other side before passing any
order on IA.NO.3. There is no merit in the Writ Petition.
Accordingly, Writ Petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
LDC
