Karnataka High Court
Sri. Rajesh A R vs Smt. Gayathri J on 10 January, 2023
Bench: H T Prasad
-1-
MFA No. 7990 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7990 OF 2022 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. RAJESH A R
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
S/O LATE A G RAGHURAM
2. SMT RAMAVATHI
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
W/O LATE A G RAGHURAM
BOTH ARE RESIDING NEAR
DODDAMMA TEMPLE, AMRUTHAHALLI
SAHAKARNAGAR POST
Digitally signed BENGALURU-560092.
by
DHANALAKSHMI ...APPELLANTS
MURTHY
Location: High (BY SRI. B V BADRINATH., ADVOCATE)
Court of
Karnataka AND:
SMT. GAYATHRI J
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
W/O P NAGARAJ
RESIDING AT NO.136/2
PILLAPPA COMPOUND
NEXT TO RELIANCE FRESH
AMRUTHAHALLI, BENGALURU-560092.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. BRAMHANANDA R. AND HARISH N.V,ADVOCATES)
-2-
MFA No. 7990 of 2022
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC,
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.08.2022 PASSED ON I.A. NO.
1 IN O.S.NO. 2290/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE LXIII
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU
CITY (CCH-64), PARTLY ALLOWING THE I.A. NO.1 FILED
UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDER, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 (r) of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the order
dated 22.08.2022 passed by the LXIII Additional City Civil
& Sessions Judge (CCH-64), Bengaluru on I.A.Nos.1 and 2
filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of
CPC and I.A.No.3 filed by the defendants under Order
XXXIX Rule 4 of CPC in O.S.No.2290/2022.
2. For the sake of the convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court.
3. The plaintiff has filed the suit for bare injunction
in O.S.No.2290/2022 before the LXIII Additional City Civil
& Sessions Judge (CCH-64), Bengaluru. He has also filed
MFA No. 7990 of 2022
I.A.Nos.1 and 2 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC.
On the basis of the applications, the trial Court has issued
notice and granted status-quo order dated 30.03.2022.
After service of summons, the defendants have appeared
before the trail Court through their counsel. The
defendants have also filed I.A.No.3 under Order XXXIX
Rule 4 of CPC seeking vacation of the interim order passed
by the trial Court on 30.03.2022. The trial Court after
hearing on I.A.Nos.1 to 3, has passed the impugned order
by allowing I.A.Nos.1 and 2 filed by the plaintiff and
directed defendants to maintain status-quo in respect of
putting construction on the eastern side of the suit
property and not to interfere with the plaintiff's peaceful
possession and enjoyment of the suit property till disposal
of the suit. The trial Court further directed that the
defendants were entitled to undertake construction
towards eastern side of the suit property by leaving the
set back and by taking permission from the proper
authority and defendants undertake by executing the bond
MFA No. 7990 of 2022
that they will not claim equity in case the plaintiff succeeds
in the suit. Being aggrieved by the same, the defendants
are before this Court in this appeal.
4. Now the suit is set down for framing the issues.
5. In the interest of justice and in the peculiar facts
and circumstances of the case, the trial Court can dispose
of the suit as expeditiously as possible.
Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
The trial Court is directed to disposed of
O.S.No.2290/2022 as expeditiously as possible but not
later than five months from the date of receipt of certified
copy of this order.
The parties are directed to cooperate for the early
disposal of the suit.
It is also made clear that no opinion is expressed on
the merits of the case.
MFA No. 7990 of 2022
The trial Court is directed to decide the matter on
merits without influencing any finding given in the
impugned order.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HA
