Karnataka High Court
Shri V Narayana vs Dr C S Venkataraman on 5 January, 2023
Bench: H T Prasad
-1-
MFA No. 1006 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1006 OF 2014 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
SHRI V NARAYANA
S/O VENKATAGIRIAPPA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT SHANTHI LAYOUT
RAMAMURTHY NAGAR
BANGALORE 560016.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. P. VIDYASRI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. PRAKASH T HEBBAR, ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by C AND:
MALATHI 1. DR C S VENKATARAMAN
Location: S/O SHRI C V SURYANARAYANA
High Court AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
of R/AT NO.635,5TH MAIN ROAD
INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 038.
Karnataka
2. SHRI SHREEDHAR B RUDRAPPA
S/O SHRI B M RUDRAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT NO.483, 4TH FLOOR
100 FT ROAD, INDIRANAGAR
BANGALORE.
3. SRI VENKATESH
S/O KMUNIRAJ
MAJOR
-2-
MFA No. 1006 of 2014
VENKATAGIRIYAPPA BUILDING
SHANTHI LAYOUT
RAMAMURTHY NAGAR
BANGALORE-560 016.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. KRISHNAVENI P., ADVOCATE FOR R3:
NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT
V/O DATED: 11.02.2015
NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC,
AGAINST THE ORDER DT.22.01.2014 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN
O.S.NO.6422/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXIX ADDITIONAL
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE, ALLOWING
I.A.NO.1 FILED U/O 39 RULES 1 & 2 OF CPC
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the defendant No.1 under
Order XLI Rule 1(r) of Civil Procedure Code challenging the
order dated 22.01.2014 passed by the XXXIX Additional
City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore City, on IA No.1
filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of Civil Procedure
Code, allowing the application.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their rankings before the trial court.
MFA No. 1006 of 2014
3. The plaintiffs have filed a suit in
O.S.No.6422/2013 for permanent injunction before the
City Civil Judge, Bangalore contending that the first
plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property
bearing Site No.6, which was purchased from one Shirji
Pavithran, S/o.N.K.Pavihran, by a registered sale deed
dated 05.09.2005 for a valuable consideration of
Rs.3,60,000/- and that from the date of the sale deed the
first plaintiff is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of
the suit schedule property.
4. On service of summons, first defendant appeared
through counsel and filed a written statement denying the
plaint averments. Along with the plaint, the plaintiffs have
filed IA No.1 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of Civil
Procedure Code seeking interim order of temporary
injunction against the defendants and to restrain the
defendants from interfering with the construction in the
suit schedule property.
MFA No. 1006 of 2014
5. After hearing the parties, IA No.1 filed by the
plaintiffs is allowed by order dated 22.01.2014. Being
aggrieved by the same, the defendant No.1 has filed this
appeal.
6. This Court by order dated 16.07.2014 has granted
an interim order directing the parties to maintain status-
quo. The said order has been extended from time to time.
Till today, the interim order granted by this Court is
continued. The contesting parties are the plaintiffs who
are respondent Nos.1 and 2 before this Court. They are
served and unrepresented. The suit is at the stage of
evidence. The interim order is operating for the last eight
years.
7. Under these circumstances, the appeal can be
disposed of modifying the order passed by the trial court
and the status-quo order passed by this Court dated
16.07.2014 has to be continued till the disposal of the suit.
MFA No. 1006 of 2014
With the above observations, the appeal stands
disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CM
