Karnataka High Court
Smt. Bhagyamma vs Mrs. Shobha Raghurao on 28 November, 2023
Author: S.G.Pandit
Bench: S.G.Pandit
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:43138
WP No. 23288 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO.23288 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. BHAGYAMMA
D/O LATE KARGADA
VENKATARAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS.
2. SMT. JAYAMMA
D/O LATE KARGADA
Digitally signed VENKATARAMAIAH
by A K
CHANDRIKA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 3. SMT. NAGAMMA
KARNATAKA
D/O LATE KARAGADA
VENKATARAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS.
4. SMT. NAGARATHNAMMA
D/O LATE KARAGADA
VENKATARAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.
5. SMT. SUNANDAMMA
D/O LATE KARAGADA
VENKATARAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.
6. SRI. GOVINDARAJU
D/O LATE KARAGADA
VENKATARAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:43138
WP No. 23288 of 2023
7. SMT. VENKATAMMA
W/O SRI. GOVINDARAJU
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.
8. SRI. PRATHAP
S/O SRI. GOVINDARAJU
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS.
ALL THE ABOVE ARE
RESIDING AT NO.318
NEAR YELLAMMA TEMPLE
KAYISOPPINA BEEDI
5TH WARD, RAMANAGARA TOW,
RAMANAGARA - 562159
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. KIRAN N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MRS. SHOBHA RAGHURAO
W/O K. RAGHURAO
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS.
2. MR. K. RAGHU RAO
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.
BOTH ARE R/AT NO.7/1
11TH MAIN ROAD
NEAR SWAMI TENT HOUSE
VRUSHABHAVATHI NAGAR
KAMAKSHIPALYA, BANGALORE - 560079.
3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
RAMANAGARA TOWN POLICE STATION
RAMANAGARA - 562159.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.N. DEVARAJA, ADV., FOR
SRI. LOURDU MARIYAPPA A, ADV., FOR R1 & R2
SRI. BOPPANNA BELLIAPPA, AGA FOR R3)
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:43138
WP No. 23288 of 2023
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS OF THE O.S. NO.489/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
HON'BLE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT
RAMANAGARA. QUASH THE ORDER OF EMERGENT NOTICE
DATED 09/10/2023, PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT RAMANAGARA AS PER
ANNEXURE-K & ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Though this petition is listed for orders, with the
consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is
taken up for final disposal.
2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Kiran N., for the
petitioners-plaintiffs, learned counsel Sri.S.N.Devaraja for
Sri.Lourdu Mariyappa A., for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and
learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.Boppanna
Belliappa for respondent No.3 and perused the writ
petition papers.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners-plaintiffs
would submit that the petitioners-plaintiffs filed
O.S.No.489/2023 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge
NC: 2023:KHC:43138
& CJM, Ramanagara, (for short, 'the trial Court') for
judgment and decree to declare the registered General
Power of Attorney dated 25.07.2022 executed in favour of
defendant Nos.1 and 2 by means of fraud and
misrepresentation and diverting the attention of the
plaintiffs in respect of the suit schedule property as null
and void-ab-initio and for cancellation of the registered
agreement of sale dated 25.07.2022 and also for
permanent injunction. Along with the suit, the petitioners-
plaintiffs have also filed I.A.No.1/2023 under Order XXXIX
Rules 1 and 2 of CPC to restrain the respondents-
defendants from interfering and meddling with the
peaceful possession and enjoyment of suit schedule
property by the petitioners-plaintiffs. It is submitted that
the trial Court without examining as to whether the
petitioners-plaintiffs have made out a prima-facie case,
ordered emergent notice by its order dated 09.10.2023.
Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners-plaintiffs
preferred this writ petition.
NC: 2023:KHC:43138
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners-plaintiffs
brought to the notice of this Court that on 19.10.2023
while ordering issuance of emergent notice, this Court
restrained the respondents-defendants from interfering
with the petitioners-plaintiffs peaceful possession and
enjoyment of the petition schedule property. Learned
counsel submits that the General Power of Attorney got
executed in favour of respondent/defendant Nos.1 and 2
is a concocted document and created by playing fraud.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent
Nos.1 and 2 would submit that the trial Court is justified in
issuing emergent notice on I.A.No.1 filed under Order
XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC and further submits that they
may be permitted to file objections to the said application.
6. Under impugned order dated 09.10.2023, the
trial Court ordered issuance of emergent notice on
I.A.No.1 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC and
also suit summons to the respondents-defendants. While
making such order, the trial Court has recorded that on
NC: 2023:KHC:43138
careful perusal of the documents produced by the
plaintiffs, it was of the opinion that before passing
ex-parte orders on I.A.No.1, it is necessary to hear the
other side.
7. Since this Court, on 19.10.2023, has passed
order restraining the respondents-defendants from
interfering with the petitioners-plaintiffs' peaceful
possession and enjoyment of the petition schedule
property, I deem it appropriate to continue the said
interim order till the trial Court hears the parties on
I.A.No.1 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC.
8. Learned counsel for the respondent/defendants
Nos.1 and 2 would submit that defendant Nos.1 and 2
would appear before the trial Court on 05.12.2023 and
file their objections on the said date. If the objections are
filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 on the said day, the trial
Court to hear the matter and dispose of I.A.No.1 filed
under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC expeditiously.
NC: 2023:KHC:43138
9. At this stage, it may not be appropriate for this
Court to consider the contentions of the parties.
10. It is made clear that the trial Court, while
considering and passing order on I.A.No.1 filed under
Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, shall not be influenced
by the order passed by this Court and it shall
independently consider I.A.No.1 and pass orders in
accordance with law. Interim order dated 19.10.2023
passed by this Court is continued till order are passed on
I.A.No.1.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BSR
